h2h Corner ~ Why I want Mark Buehrle to throw out his arm (not really)

If you don’t know me personally, you probably don’t know that I’m big into philosophy and morality – not that I’m into imposing my own on people, just that I find different approaches to what is right/wrong fascinating. I typically find my phislophy somewhere in the combination of Nietzsche, Mill and a little Schopenhauer.

So, the aspect of the Mark Buehrle story that I find fascinating is more of a morality thing. While I’m also interested in censorship and communications and PR and spin, that part of the story (mostly summed up by Jim Margalus) has been done to death.

As it goes, during an interview, Buehrle said:

“Even if you are not a dog lover, how can you sit there and make two dogs fight and one is going to die?” he said. “How could you do that if you are somewhat sane?

“He had a great year and a great comeback, but there were times where we watched the game and I know it’s bad to say, but there were times where we hope he gets hurt. Everything you’ve done to these dogs, something bad needs to happen to these guys.”

Now, I’m a dog lover (I have a puppy) and not an overly violent person – I don’t love boxing or MMA or whatnot, but who cares? Typically, I found what Vick did to be somewhat revolting – yet I thought his sentence was somewhat crazy given his crime.

And this is where I have problems with people like Buehrle. If you want to cry foul about what Vick did, you better be a vegetarian. We have made so many advances in today’s world (and given studies on humanity’s diet and evolution) there is simply no need to really eat meat at all. So, in reality, people who eat meat are doing so because it is enjoyable. There’s nothing wrong with that…I like to eat meat and don’t mind the sacrifices animals have to make for me to do so.

However, think about this. The veal or hamburger you eat was raised for the sole purpose of your enjoyable consumption. Sometimes, although not all, the animal that died for your veal parmigiana was raised under pretty harsh circumstances, injected with all kinds of antibiotics, etc.

So, to get the meat you don’t really need you tacitly are supporting this kind of lifestyle for a cow. Why is it okay for a cow to be used simply for enjoyment, while not a dog?

In doing a search before this I tried to find out whether Buehrle was a vegetarian or not. While I couldn’t find anything conclusive, I did find a story from MLB Fanhouse in which Mark Buehrle talks about hunting and ultimately killing a bear. I doubt very much Buehrle ate the bear, but that doesn’t really matter. What is the difference between hunting a bear and ultimately killing it and having two dogs fight one another?

You might say the bear had a chance – but that doesn’t really matter, Buehrle killed an animal to have fun same as Vick. While he didn’t do it as much or as heinously, if Vick’s multiple actions are immoral so is Buehrle’s one action.

Quite simply, don’t call yourself an animal lover if you kill and eat them.

About these ads

8 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Nick on February 10, 2011 at 4:32 pm

    As someone with a major in anthropology and specializing in biocultural anthropology and medical anthropology I would love to see which studies say: “there is simply no need to really eat meat at all.” Could you please cite that for me as I would find that a fascinating read?

    Based on what I know about how people process proteins from plants and animal sources I can think of several reasons why you would want to eat meat.

    That said the post is interesting. I do think that Buerhle went too far, but this seems to be a totally random and unfounded fact to insert.

    Reply

  2. Maybe I missed your point, or maybe you missed mine? I have several pieces of anecdotal evidence in the form of acquaintances that have not eaten meat for 5, 10, 20, 30 years and have not perished yet – nor has it seemed to have any negative health implications. I mean there are vegans/vegetarians in the world, right?

    You’re

    The point though is: eating meat is not a requirement to living, breeding, thriving. Consequently we eat meat because of the flavor and whatnot. Therefore, the majority of those who eat meat do so for pleasure not health reasons. And thus they are not much different than those who use animals or birds to fight each other for pleasure.

    http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html

    Reply

  3. Posted by Jennifer on February 11, 2011 at 1:06 pm

    Very well put. By the way, I am one of those long-time vegans that poster Nick seems to think are a medical and physiological impossibility. Surprise! No meat, dairy, eggs, or other animal products are necessary for vibrant health.

    I really do appreciate everything Mark Buehrle does for companion animals in shelters, though. I wish he wouldn’t hunt (I wish factory farms would go away more, though), but that’s no reason to discourage him from helping other animals. To say “If you don’t care about all animals, how dare you help some animals?” is a judgmental and highly oversimplified view, even though you put it more eloquently than any other post I’ve read about this today.

    Again, I’m one of those animal-crazies, but I encourage people to continue to fight for causes they find personally inspiring, and hope that they won’t face constant charges of hypocrisy in the process.

    Reply

  4. Posted by Albert Lang on February 11, 2011 at 1:13 pm

    Appreciate the point of view and you taking the time to comment. I also love this discussion and really try to encourage it as much as possible.

    Maybe I didnt state this clearly enough: I’m actually 100% fine with Buehrle campaigning for companion animals (while eating meat and hunting), it’s noble and important.

    The issue I have with Mark Buehrle is that, to him, what Vick did was absolutely abhorrent, whereas, in the grand scheme of things it’s not all that different from eating lots of meat or, ya know, hunting. So for him to call Vick out is kind of duplicitous. Clearly Vick was about as bad as it gets, but Buehrle is nowhere near the moral high ground on this issue, yet he acts like he is.

    If Buehrle wants to hunt, go ahead, if he wants to eat meat go ahead, however dont act like he is some animal saver crusader when he is clearly fine using animals for his personal pleasure.

    In short, I’m fine with most any personal choices – just dont try to say your choices make you better than someone else (especially when you kill bears for sport) unless they do.

    Reply

  5. Posted by Nick on February 11, 2011 at 3:15 pm

    Sorry, not my intention to say that vegans are an impossibility. Vegans are a possibility as evidenced by the fact that there are vegans and vegetarians and they do quite well in life. I actually am friends with several vegans and by and large they are quite healthy.

    My point was that you were wrong in saying that there is no reason to eat meat other than flavor. Meat is the only natural product that contains a complete protein (all the essential amino acids and all the proteins.). Vegans and vegetarians need to make sure that they eat all of them, and this is a problem that they need to be aware of (hence why so many books are out there about how to eat well and vegetarian/vegan).

    I don’t have the time to go into this further at this time (but I welcome the opportunity) becaues I have a meeting to get to. But let me end on this: I respect vegans/vegetarians for who they are and why they do what they do. I understand there are a whole lot of them, and they are healthy. What my problem was was that you were making it sound like there are scientific reasons for why somebody would NOT want to eat meat. If there is a study about how we could have evolved without meat I would love to see it.

    If you have any quesions for me, or see any flaws in what I said please let me know and I will happily address them ~11pm PST in a post. (just so you know I’m not runnign away!)

    Nick

    PS I didn’t read this a second time over… so please don’t think I was being rude or anything just short on time!

    Reply

  6. Posted by Sach on February 17, 2011 at 7:31 pm

    Mark bhuerle is worth a late draft pick at best. His Era is too high and his strikeouts is low. Not a full all around performer in Fantasy. His only plus is he pitches quickly, unfortunately that won’t help u in ur league. Look for a sp who brings mire stats to the table.

    Reply

  7. Posted by Albert Lang on February 17, 2011 at 7:37 pm

    I dont think anyone is debating Mark Buehrle’s fantasy – at no point have i ever advocated someone taking Buehrle…..

    Reply

  8. [...] But I want to focus on Loyola College Baltimore – My dad went there, so did Tom Clancy – I love Tom Clancy and am shocked his masterpiece, Without Remorse has not been made into a great Hollywood film yet. I was a philosophy minor in college (to go along with an English with an emphasis in creative writing major – can’t you tell?) and grew found of John Stuart Mill. Working my way through the greatest happiness principle and Bentham and reading Without Remorse, which, essentially, is about a highly trained ex-military person taking out his revenge on a group of drug dealers and pimps – kind of like McNulty. Anyway, it’s an interesting yarn that makes you think about what is and isn’t moral. [...]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,756 other followers

%d bloggers like this: