Arguments Against Bullfighting

I am against of the bullfights, but also against its prohibition. If one accepts that a majority can prohibit the bulls for animal compassion, he will have to accept that one day another majority (probably a religious one), will prohibit all the citizens from killing animals to eat meat. I am going to explain my position, knowing that it is going to satisfy neither the bullfighting nor the anti-bullfighting stance.

The tolerance is to not prohibit what we do not like. I tolerate them, although I do not like, the boxing or prostitution: I don’t like the ban either. In this case, I am not very far from what I think about suicide, tobacco or the heroin: I do not agree (almost never) with which the people are matte or goal heavy drugs, but would not prohibit the human decision of harming yourself. If someone

They appear like a primitive spectacle to me. Perhaps in that is its delight and its horror. But I am a carnivore. I do not see that there is agreement between the sensible and moral persons if the bullfights should be prohibited or not. There is no universal consensus as in case of, for example, the human sacrifices or the sexual assault. These activities both fall in the intolerable zone of conduct. On the other hand, without many horrendous investigations on animals, the medical science would not advance, or at the least would advance much more slowly. Despite the conscience that our behavior with the animals is not "just", we eat them and experiment with them. We are unjust, cruel. Yes. We have to live with this moral tragedy. And tolerate the bullfights, although we do not like them. To tolerate the bullfights is to tolerate our deepest human condition: we are cruel and violent. In any other way, we would not have survived. I do not want that the bullfights to be banned: I would rather prefer to see them become extinct. In the case of the bullfights, I put the value of the human freedom above that of the nonviolence against