Originally posted by paulversuspaul
How is either sport, MMA or Boxing, even legal in the 21st century. People paying good money to see grown men beat each other is surely a sign of a decadent civilization more than anything else.
I'm a pacifist who can't watch two grown ups hitting each other, and I can't find a single reason why it shouldn't be legal.
They're both there willingly. There are rules to avoid permanent damage. Besides, MMA fighters spend more time hugging and cuddling than actually inflicting pain on each other :p
paulversuspaul
quote:
Originally posted by Lira
I'm a pacifist who can't watch two grown ups hitting each other, and I can't find a single reason why it shouldn't be legal.
They're both there willingly. There are rules to avoid permanent damage. Besides, MMA fighters spend more time hugging and cuddling than actually inflicting pain on each other :p
In general, im not in favor of banning anything, that being said, in a society in which multiple things from prostitution to weed to raves are illegal, the fact that these two "sports" are not speaks volumes about the kind of societies we live in.
Lira
quote:
Originally posted by paulversuspaul
In general, im not in favor of banning anything, that being said, in a society in which multiple things from prostitution to weed to raves are illegal, the fact that these two "sports" are not speaks volumes about the kind of societies we live in.
Prostitution and raves are legal where I live, so I can only talk about weed.
I'd argue that it makes much more sense to legalise MMA and boxing than weed (or tobacco, for that matter):
Passive smoking: Two people fighting each other within a ring or an octagon can hardly do any harm to someone who's watching. Unless you're some sort of air bender, there's little you can do about smoke.
Context: Street brawls aren't legal either in Brazil or in the US, as far as I can tell. If you knock someone out on the street, you're a felon. There's a judge watching both fighters' every move in a sport, however, and you can only do it in certain areas. The same isn't true when it comes to weed or tobacco - if you decide to drive while high, you have to stumble upon a policeman to run the risk of being stopped. You may well run over someone before that. Same with alcohol, actually, but that's not out focus here.
Health: I mean, seriously. Have you looked at their bodies? Sure, there's always the risk of concussion and whatnot (which we've covered above), but whereas you tend to get in better health while fighting, you'd have to say Michael Phelps became the world's greatest swimming regardless of the fact he smokes weed, not because of it. Otherwise most people would hit a joint way before hitting the gym.
So, yeah. I'm not saying I'm in favour of criminalising cannabis, but comparing the legalisation of MMA to the prohibition of weed is neither here nor there. The former makes much more sense.
paulversuspaul
I will say this. As a physician scientist, I can easily state that boxing or MMA causes way more brain damage than MDMA use. Period. But one is banned while the other is celebrated. I find both sports really disgusting on a moral and ethical level. The amount of brain damage inflicted on people who partake in either of these activities should be more discussed and debated in a society than bans psychedelics for so called public health concerns.
Lira
quote:
Originally posted by paulversuspaul
I will say this. As a physician scientist, I can easily state that boxing or MMA causes way more brain damage than MDMA use. Period. But one is banned while the other is celebrated.
But, I covered that already in agreement with you, I said you're much more likely to get concussions in fights than with--wait, MDMA? Are moving on to other drugs now? Where exactly are we drawing the line here?
quote:
Originally posted by paulversuspaul
I find both sports really disgusting on a moral and ethical level.
How can it be either immoral or unethical if they're both there willingly and following a mutually agreed set of rules!?
It's like people who want to outlaw cannabis because they find it immoral or unethical. Unless you're shoving a joint down someone's throat (or you're making someone inhale the smoke against their will), neither MMA nor weed is "immoral" or "unethical" in any possible sense.
quote:
Originally posted by paulversuspaul
The amount of brain damage inflicted on people who partake in either of these activities should be more discussed and debated in a society than bans psychedelics for so called public health concerns.
But it is widely discussed. I mean, Muhammad Ali suffered from Parkinson's, and the correlation with his boxing career wasn't exactly a secret... How much more discussion would exactly like to see? :conf:
paulversuspaul
im not saying ban it. im saying the fact that it's perfectly legal while other things that follow that same logic are illegal, things which cause less harm mind you, shows what kind of society we live in: a hypocritical decadent one. thousands of years from now people will read about mma and boxing in textbooks as examples of our decadent society. I find purposefully inflicting bodily harm on another human being immoral. The whole spectacle to me is immoral because cheering people trying to beat the out of each other is not something a civilized person should do. Now even i fall at this many times. There are probably vegans who find my eating meat immoral. They are probably right. but i would hope that i am not the only person who thinks perhaps that at this stage of human development we shouldn't beat each other up purely for entertainment.
wotyzoid
☭
C0r leAk
AlphaStarred
quote:
Originally posted by paulversuspaul
I will say this. As a physician scientist, I can easily state that boxing or MMA causes way more brain damage than MDMA use.
And ECT causes way more brain damage than all of the above, and is not only legal, but continues to be recommended by psychiatrists as a "therapeutic" treatment.
Sykonee
"Never bet on the white guy." - Frank Drebin
Lira
quote:
Originally posted by paulversuspaul
There are probably vegans who find my eating meat immoral. They are probably right. but i would hope that i am not the only person who thinks perhaps that at this stage of human development we shouldn't beat each other up purely for entertainment.
What I'm trying to show you is that you're blowing it way out of proportion. You're comparing meat eating to boxing. Look at what's just happened: a technical knockout. Why? Because it would be unsafe to continue.
It's not a fight to the death. A vegan can, at the very least, say the animals don't give permission to be devoured, and then claim it is immoral (by the way, despite the fact I'm a vegetarian, I'd still argue killing for food may be inevitable for quite a few decades, therefore it's hardly fair to call meat-eaters immoral too). Now, if there's something hypocritical about our "decadent" society, it's extreme poverty, child mortality, slavery... in which the receiving end has little or no control about what's being done to them. But, boxing in a world where marijuana is illegal? That's hardly what makes us hypocritical.
SYSTEM-J
quote:
Originally posted by paulversuspaul
im not saying ban it. im saying the fact that it's perfectly legal while other things that follow that same logic are illegal, things which cause less harm mind you, shows what kind of society we live in: a hypocritical decadent one.
Could drug use and prostitution not be considered "decadent" though? Drugs are really illegal because of the threat they pose to social control. It's a lot harder to wake up on a Monday morning and be a productive contributor to society if you were awake for 48 hours on Saturday and Sunday having the time of your life. Boxing and MMA, by contrast, are regulated sports. Legalising boxing doesn't really have any widespread impact on the lives of ordinary citizens. Sports also promote physical health and dedicated work ethic; they reinforce rather than undermine the values of our society.
quote:
Originally posted by Lira
I'd argue that it makes much more sense to legalise MMA and boxing than weed (or tobacco, for that matter):[list][*]Passive smoking: Two people fighting each other within a ring or an octagon can hardly do any harm to someone who's watching. Unless you're some sort of air bender, there's little you can do about smoke.
[*]Context: Street brawls aren't legal either in Brazil or in the US, as far as I can tell. If you knock someone out on the street, you're a felon. There's a judge watching both fighters' every move in a sport, however, and you can only do it in certain areas. The same isn't true when it comes to weed or tobacco - if you decide to drive while high, you have to stumble upon a policeman to run the risk of being stopped. You may well run over someone before that. Same with alcohol, actually, but that's not out focus here.
There are already laws controlling smoking in public places and driving whilst intoxicated. Keeping weed illegal on these grounds doesn't make an ounce of sense.
ziptnf
quote:
Originally posted by wotyzoid
Connor has 4 rounds to put him away, after that he's not gonna be able to touch him.
Spot on, btw. McGregor got tired after R4 and it was completely one sided.
McGregor literally didn't look like a boxer at all. His moves and holds were all drunken and unorthodox. Maybe if he was a little faster, he could be a good boxer but last night he just didn't look like he knew what he was doing. Floyd picked him apart technically and strategically.
