- This topic has 44 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
We’ve all (well the NH fans amongst us) have all seen horses jumping over fences like works of art. I’m thinking back to one of my favourites who died on the course, Ellerslie George. The tapes went up, the horse sped off & nothing nor anybody was going to stop him.
And I remember the last time I saw Mon Mome ‘in the flesh’ walking around the parade ring, head down and as soon as the jockey got on board it was like someone flicked a switch.
Is horse racing, with all its injuries, fatalities & potential for mis-treatment amongst those that don’t make the grade morally justifiable? I don’t know.
But to not allow horses to do what they were born to do & what comes naturally to them, and for us to not be allowed to see them in full flight, is morally reprehensible.
Where I grew up, horses would often trot past with chubby kids on their back up & down the busy road past my house. There are worse things you can subject a horse to than racing!
I’m not a philosopher, but I love horseracing and horseriding. I agree with Cormack’s points. Saturday was dire, very sad. But all equine fatalities are sad, no matter where they happen. I know that the vast majority of racehorses are well looked after and that the lucky ones continue to be well looked after when they finish racing.
My main concern with horseracing is with what happens to horses when they finish racing, or those that don’t make the grade and I would like to see far more emphasis put on this. Practices that go on in studs are far worse, the use of foster mares, bred to get in foal, foals killed at birth and mares used to foster foals for racing, this happens and is unacceptable. Yearlings that don’t thrive are shot, this happens too. This is what I find unjustifiable in horseracing. The thing is that these things can be changed. The risks in racing horses will always be there, but as Mr Stewart (owner of Ornais) said, life is risky, even his own son had a life changing accident whilst snow boarding.
Excellent post, Tuffers. Nail on the head.
I’d also add – being a bit of a greenie and animal rightist – that Japanese scientific whaling, genocidal overfishing in Asia, shark definning off Costa Rica, clearcutting and deforestation in "emerging" nations, the Bushmeat trade, the pollution caused by multi-national companies etc etc are far more pressing concerns for angry young people.
But it’s a lot easier to get stoned and rock up to Aintree with your mates than sign up to a Greenpeace boat.
Perhaps we should be asking is it morally justified that a small pressure group(s) is allowed to create such a disproportionate effect. Nothing is perfect, but most/many race horses are treated like pets (despite what Paul Nicholls say’s in his book) and perhaps it is because of this partly why we are so affected when a horse is killed or injured.
Horse racing must also never assume things can’t improve but as other have said there are many more things going on which are seldom commented on that we should question our morals on.
Perhaps it has been done or horse neuroscience it not advanced enough, but perhaps someone can try measuring a race horse’s brain reaction when running in a race then we may have the beginning of the answer to how a horse is reacting. You would hope that the outcome makes this sort of question redundant.
- Total Posts 17716
Those of you who have made the point (in various ways) that the question of moral justification needs to be turned back squarely in the faces of the Animal Righters are absolutely right.
(1) We do not need to answer the question of the morality of our sport – the destructive attackers need to justify their own moral stance first, by defining what they mean by invoking
"morality"
in this context. I hear sentimental, shallow rhetoric. I hear refusal to face the reality of death. I hear envy of other people enjoying themselves. I do not hear a compelling
moral
argument.
(2) What is their
moral justification
for trying to kill off this sport, when there is so much – unarguably worse – morally unjustified behaviour going on towards horses, man and every other kind of animal, in so many contexts other than the racecourse?
(3) What is their
moral justification
for incessantly scheming to impose their standards and tastes on the rest of the population?
(4) What is their
moral justification
for smearing and insulting the trainers, jockeys and stable staff by accusing them of heartless, sadistic cruelty towards the horses they care for and love?
(5) What is their
moral justification
for seeking to remove the right of any people, anywhere, to "exploit" animals for food, fabrics or fun?
These are the
real
moral questions in the case. These people are working to make us feel guilty about the sport we love. It is time that we showed them that they are the ones who should be feeling that guilt, for their essentially
immoral
stance.
- Total Posts 17716
PS
– I’ve just emailed Animal Aid, with a batch of questions based on the above points. I will let you know if I hear anything from them. Don’t hold your breath.
Hi All
I agree with most of the reasoning on this thread.
Pinza – I think that we should be somewhat circumspect mate re point 5 and the use of the word "exploit" in the current climate.
There are undoubtedly people in racing who may not treat animals impeccably , but that mirrors society generally , and Thisthatandtothers post really did highlight some concerns.
I think that the sport / industry should look at the curent concerns , put our house in order, and move onThe question makes me laugh!!
What a load of nonsense.
Is anything morally justifiable?
Why dont we just ban everything I love, racing, fishing, hunting, make football no contact and outlaw swearing and spitting in the game, ban liquor sales and while we are at it put a toll on smiling and laughing. Most laughs are usually at the expense of others. That cant be right either.
Do gooders are quickly ruinning the world. Rights activists do more harm than good most of the time. I love all animals. Not a cruel bone in my body towards them. Apart from big spiders in my bathroom who I kill on sight. Its sad when a horse breaks down or is killed. All of our stomachs jerk a little bit. But you get on with it as its racing. Some of my fathers horses and greyhounds suffered fatal injuries but its part of the game and you move on. You take the rough with the smooth.
But come on people give me a break people, there are alot more important matters in the world to be sorted before we start questioning racing.
Do gooders I hate you all from the bottom of my heart. Im glad I purposely know very few in real life as I wouldnt give them the time of day. You can try wrapping everything in cotton wool but life is survival of the fittest.
The only morals I would question in racing is corruption and bent trainners and jockies. The actual sport itself is fine thank you very much.
- Total Posts 17716
You discussed only the animal care activists.
You did not discuss the bible belt-Alabama types and the left who want to prohibit horse race betting.Is horse racing morally justifiable? I dont think so
For us as a forward thinkin society to allow an animal to be bred for and then forcefully used for our own entertainment is an abhorrent misuse of our power over these creatures and comparisons to breeding cows and pigs for sustenance just doesnt wash with me
The fact may be that the ones good enough are treated well but the ones that dont happen to be able to run fast enough are disposed
The use of the argument that ah well there are worse things going on in the world is a poor argument used over and over again in the defence on this thread and again doesnt wash with me, i mean if everyone took that attitude where the hell would our society beI like cormacks argument for the defence and feel he put forward a well reasoned and informative debate on his reasons for why he thinks it is morally justifiable
Now heres my view on it i have no love for the horse as an animal and only care about my ability to bet on them in the expectation that they are fit and well and will run to form.Am i hypocritical? very much so. Do i care? not a bit
From a Darwinian point of view horse racing is not only justifiable but essential for horses. Horses have developed a symbiosis with humans which has made them extremely successful. This success managed to supercede their loss of a niche when their use as farm animals and for transport became obsolete.
If horse racing was banned, these horses would not be running happily around a field somewhere; thye simply wouldn’t exist in the first place. Which would an animal-lover prefer?You discussed only the animal care activists.
You did not discuss the bible belt-Alabama types and the left who want to prohibit horse race betting.Not to defend our Christ Crispies, but horse racing is one of the most popular sports in the south along with NASCAR and college football. Kentucky is as Bible Belt as you can get. Virginia, West Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma all have parimutuel Thoroughbred racing. Not to mention the old Birmingham Turf Club
in
Alabama which currently runs greyhounds. Horse racing provides $$$, and that’s all that matters.
- Total Posts 17716
You discussed only the animal care activists.
You did not discuss the bible belt-Alabama types and the left who want to prohibit horse race betting.Not to defend our Christ Crispies, but horse racing is one of the most popular sports in the south along with NASCAR and college football. Kentucky is as Bible Belt as you can get. Virginia, West Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma all have parimutuel Thoroughbred racing. Not to mention the old Birmingham Turf Club
in
Alabama which currently runs greyhounds. Horse racing provides $$$, and that’s all that matters.
This is a metaphor not really about Alabama.
I could say Moscow agents, but there again think how many happy hours have the Bolshoi ballets given to us.
But horse racing was in fact prohibited in those states, in the very early 20th century and before the alcohol prohibition.
But in our days the ultra religious heve been replaced by the left.In Greece it is exaclty the same leftists who talk of prohibition on both grounds.
In 1995-2000 they opposed the old Hellenikon airport area for the site of a new race course, because of some birds found there.
Hellenikon is a magnificent location and if we had it, the wealthiest stables of Europe would come here. Everybody knows it now, but it’s too late.
On the Saronic bay, distance from Athens 10-15 minutes by private car, 25-30 minutes by bus.
Exactly the same crowds now want to prohibit all forms of gambling and the last nickname theey were given is "North Koreans".Personally I knew it was doomsday for Greek races the moment they announced we are getting the Olympics, in 1997, because I knew of the government’s silly plans. Strangely, without the Olympics of 2004 horse racing was going escape. By some coincidence the 1997 announcement came in early afternoon, so I was in the raceourse. Some people were very happy but I told them "you are going to have to forget races because of this".
They thought I was an "anti-socialist agent of reaction".
We have now a very good Olympic equestrian course, visited by Athina Onassis also who is a rider but the race course is a white elephant. The Greek governmet are so silly in what relates to horse racing that even so, they left the place they built stranded. In 2004 I went to Greek DCMS and said "ok guys, you built this, now it’s Olympic year, you are trying to attract tourism, so lets have a good photographic display of this new race course of yours to show in the web, to Europe, America". One of the diabolical employees replied to this "it’s not my function to act without authorization from the bosses". There were never any photos published, but at the same time photos of all other kinds of sports complexes were produced (to the extent that the government was accused of overdoing it). The treatment the race course gets leaves a lot to be desired.When we talk about horse welfare, there are two possibilities.
One is we accept horse racing as a sport and we punish those who treat the animals badly or because of their critical omissions are responsible for the animals having problems.
I side with this camp.
The other is to say let’s not have any races because sometimes it proves dabgerous to the horses. That’s absurd because first of all the lose horses do have accidents and second the racing horses live to race. They love it and enjoy it.
It is not like bull fighting where the bull is not born to fight men and a violent sport was created. Horse racing is not a violent sport.Is horse racing morally justifiable? I dont think so
For us as a forward thinkin society to allow an animal to be bred for and then forcefully used for our own entertainment is an abhorrent misuse of our power over these creatures and comparisons to breeding cows and pigs for sustenance just doesnt wash with me
The fact may be that the ones good enough are treated well but the ones that dont happen to be able to run fast enough are disposed
The use of the argument that ah well there are worse things going on in the world is a poor argument used over and over again in the defence on this thread and again doesnt wash with me, i mean if everyone took that attitude where the hell would our society beI like cormacks argument for the defence and feel he put forward a well reasoned and informative debate on his reasons for why he thinks it is morally justifiable
Now heres my view on it i have no love for the horse as an animal and only care about my ability to bet on them in the expectation that they are fit and well and will run to form.Am i hypocritical? very much so. Do i care? not a bit
What he said (apart from having no love for horses) ^^^^
I think there is a moral case for giving animals equal rights with humans. Animals are exploited today because they are not intelligent and can’t talk. Eventually discrimination against animals (speciesism) might seem like racism is today.
An academic, Peter Singer, in
Practical Ethics
, makes a persuasive case for this view.
If you accept this line of reasoning, then it leads to vegetarianism and much stronger animal rights.
However, imagine if horses could talk intelligently. Would they vote for racing? I don’t think they would have much trouble voting for flat racing. The horses are well looked after and not at huge risk.
Possibly they would even vote for jump racing on the grounds that a 4/1000 chance of death per race is an acceptable risk for horses that will be looked after very well. I would guess life expectancy for jumpers is much higher than it is for wild horses. However, my suspicion is that the horse trade union might strongly encourage hurdling in preference to steeplechasing on health and safety grounds.you can’t make a horse race if it doesn’t want to.
its choice should be respected.
but you have to get that choice from the horse itself, not some self-appointed human with who-knows-what agenda.
i don’t equate horses with humans, but to those who apparently do:
you might as well ask if it is morally justifiable to school a human child.
Is horse racing morally justifiable? I dont think so
For us as a forward thinkin society to allow an animal to be bred for and then forcefully used for our own entertainment is an abhorrent misuse of our power over these creatures and comparisons to breeding cows and pigs for sustenance just doesnt wash with me
The fact may be that the ones good enough are treated well but the ones that dont happen to be able to run fast enough are disposed
The use of the argument that ah well there are worse things going on in the world is a poor argument used over and over again in the defence on this thread and again doesnt wash with me, i mean if everyone took that attitude where the hell would our society beI like cormacks argument for the defence and feel he put forward a well reasoned and informative debate on his reasons for why he thinks it is morally justifiable
Now heres my view on it i have no love for the horse as an animal and only care about my ability to bet on them in the expectation that they are fit and well and will run to form.Am i hypocritical? very much so. Do i care? not a bit
My previous post was a call for some perspective. Assuming we’re putting this issue into perspective then I’m happy to have a stab at providing a moral justification for horseracing.
I would start by considering the counterfactual ie what would be the situation without horseracing. In reality I think the answer would be ‘no thoroughbreds’. I don’t think you can argue all those horses would be put to other uses. Quite simply they would be destroyed.
If you don’t like that argument on the grounds that they were bred for racing in the first place so wouldn’t have had to be destroyed had racing not existed then let’s assume that the counterfactual is wild thoroughbreds with no human interference. We’re now basically having a discussion on the morality of taking a wild animal and domesticating it for our own use.
It might be very convenient for people to dismiss the comparison between racing horses and rearing animals for slaughter but I would respectfully submit that the comparison is sound. Both involve controlling completely the lives of animals so both involve a removal of some of the animal’s ‘freedom’ (more on that later). The justification of breeding animals for slaughter on the grounds that it provides ‘sustenance’ rather than ‘entertainment’ holds no water IMHO. Humans require neither meat nor horse racing to survive but I’m assuming it’s common ground that we’re not expecting to return to a subsistence society. If we can justify taking an animal’s life for our pleasure (yes, eating meat is done for the enjoyment of the meat – you can survive quite happily without it) we can certainly justify racing an animal which includes a small
risk
of an early death rather than the
certainty
of an early death for the chicken or pig that ends up on your plate.
So what ‘freedom’ are we removing by taking horses from the wild. I can do no better than the words of Yann Martel:
"Animals in the wild lead lives of compulsion and necessity within an unforgiving social hierarchy in an environment where the supply of fear is high and the supply of food low and where territory must constantly be defended and parasites forever endured. What is the meaning of freedom in such a context? Animals in the wild are, in practice, free neither in space nor in time, nor in their personal relations."
The thoroughbred, I would submit, would choose the life of a racehorse over the life of a wild horse.
Ask me to justify the production of milk to put in my coffee however and I struggle to give you an answer. If you have heard (as I have) the desperate and unceasing cries of the cows when their calves are taken from them so that we can take the milk for ourselves that was intended for their young then justifying the morality of horseracing by comparison becomes an easy matter.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.