preview

Comparing Football And Dogfighting

Decent Essays
Open Document

Football plays a large role in many American lives. “Football is a sport in which the main objective is for players to throw, kick, or carry an oval ball into an area at the end of the field to score points.” (Dictionary). The players need to complete this objective while trying to avoid the opposing team from tackling or stealing the ball from them. On the other hand, dogfighting plays a role in American lives as well. Dogfighting is a sport in which two dogs fight violently, the objective is to hit and not get hit. Dogfighting is arranged for spectator entertainment and betting, which normally ends in the death of the loser. Many people believe that one of these is considered “unmoral”. What is morality? “Morality is the principles concerning …show more content…

For example both sports were created for the viewing of audiences, and both involve heavy betting. These activities were created to keep people entertained, because if people aren’t kept entertained their actions are unpredictable and they present a large threat to society. Football keeps viewers entertained and suspenseful until the next season. Likewise, dogfighting keeps the viewers suspenseful until the next fight. Fans of these sports have a commitment that cannot be matched by any other. Like Gladwell says, “There is nothing else to be done, not so long as fans stand and cheer. We are in love with football players, with their courage and grit, and nothing else – neither considerations of science not those of morality – can compete with the destructive power of that love.” (Gladwell). He is saying that people fall in love with the bravery and grit that football players have; likewise, in dog fighting, people fall in love with the dog’s courage and grit. Both audiences love the sports for the same reasons, the players drive and willingness to keep playing after getting hurt. Also both sports involve the players getting injured and making a comeback. When players make comebacks it shows the viewers how committed the players are to their sport and it makes them more supportive and creates a greater attachment to that player. This is especially true in dogfighting, where the term …show more content…

These “immoral qualities” are required in both sports. Without them, the sports wouldn’t be the same and less than 5% of the viewers would watch. Also in both activities the players have free will. “Free will is the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; that ability to act to one’s own will.” (Oxford). Many people overlook this fact for dogfighting and think that dogs don’t have a choice, but in reality they do. The same way players can choose if they want to play, dogs can choose if they want to fight or not. They must be crazy if they both choose to participate and risk injury right? Wrong, its either they choose to participate and have shelter, food, and a bed to sleep on, or they can choose not to participate and have no food, shelter, or bed to sleep on. In football, almost 90% of the players do not know anything besides football, so if they choose not to play, then they lose their contract and have no income, and no income leads to no home, food, shelter, or money. In dogs cases it’s a little bit different. If a dog chooses not to fight they get released into the wilderness, or sold to a new owner. Both sports also have long term injuries in common.

Get Access