This is an incredibly Stupid argument

Kathy Rudy, an ethicist and associate professor of women's studies at Duke University writes an opinion piece in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. In it, she asks, why is dogfighting so vilified, while rodeos, horse and dog racing are not? She also mentions the large number of dogs and cats that are euthanized, and the "billions" of animals that are "tortured" for food.

So what is her conclusion? She attempts to explain that while dog fighting is illegal and these other forms of "animal cruelty" are not, the real reason behind all this is racism. Dog (and cock) fighting, she claims, are sports of lower classes, mainly people of color, or poor whites.

I'm sorry Ms. Rudy - you've put up the wrong argument. It's not because these sports are illegal, but they are the only "sports" that you mention that place two helpless animals in a ring with the sole intention of having one of them rip the other to pieces! You might argue that horse racing is cruel, and that sometimes the animals are put down due to injury, and you'd be correct. But I've never seen two thoroughbred go at it on the track. I've never seen a Rodeo clown put two bucking broncos in the arena with knives attached to their feet so they can slash each other.

No, the reason dogfighting is illegal has nothing to do with race, or class. It is simply because it pits two animals against each other. It isn't racist, or classist. Michael Vick is not being charged with being black, or for being part of hip-hop. There's no conspiracy to link dogfighting and black culture. He's admitted guilt to breeding and killing animals who couldn't defend themselves. That's not racist, that's the truth.