Through your gambling, you fund people who slaughter horses for entertainment. Their blood is on your hands.
To counter your argument I'd have to restate points I have already made and which you never addressed. That usually means your debating opponent isn't listening, or is just on the wind up.
What, banning cars because people are killed? I ignored it because it is a ludicrous comparrison. How many of the people killed by cars would have wanted to ban them? 0.01% maybe? The choice has been taken by all of us and the vast majority are in favour of keeping cars.
Your logic is complete ****e. The situation isn't comparable. Also, cars aren't animals that have been bred for the purposes of sport. Neither do they feel pain.
Unless you are a strict vegan, then it's very hypocritical to start jumping on the 'horse racings cruel' bandwagon. Most animal rights people are hipocrites as they themselves, eat meat, eat dairy products, and wash there hair with shampoos that have been tested on animals first. Alot of them probably wear clothes made from animal fur
Like I said, we draw the line as we see fit. ST and Toby don't eat meat, that's their choice. I draw the line between killing for food and killing for entertainment. You presumably draw the line somewhere, dog fighting perhaps?
So horses which fall, break their leg and are put down isn't cruel? It may not happen often but it happens as a result of an activity which is entertainment and is funded by people who gamble.
Would you rather the horse is kept alive and unable to move? Some horses do break their legs and don't get shot if the vet in the scene thinks the horse can recover. Horses go through a vigorous health screen before races to see if they are healthy enough.
From a Utilitarian point of view cars are a positive addition to humanity - despite the death toll, great benefits and liberations are gained for the majority of people who use cars, while a small amount of people pay with their lives - some of these are pedestrians who haven't made an active choice to drive a car. As for the comparison with race horses, the majority of them live lives which are greatly privileged compared to most other animals in captivity. A few of them die while performing the task they have been bred to perform. I'd argue this is a price worth paying for the privilege of the majority - in fact there is a good chance these horses wouldn't exist at all if they were not bred for this, and if we banned racing what would be the fate that awaits those redundant horses?
This sort of logic is bullshit. The horses exist only because people like you bet on them. And what has their health got to do with it? "Sorry horsey, you've broken your leg and we're going to have to shoot you in the head. But, on the plus side, your coat's nice and shiny." Again, just bizarrely illogical. If they were never bred they wouldn't exist. Using your logic you can justify anything. Breeding humans as slaves? They get shelter and food and, let's face it, they exist so that's alright eh?
