View Single Post
Old 04-04-2008, 04:02 PM   #85
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Re: Ultimate fights expand to include kids

Buck wrote:

Quote:
All the great and powerful warring societies knew to be effective in making a warrior you had to condition the kids early to be warriors from an early age. Japan was a great example of that. Throw in Sparta too. There are lots of examples of that in countries today too. Then they become adults influence society to continue acceptance of violence and the cycle of violence continues. Water it down to tolerant levels and Volia! There you have it our modern culture of contact sports.
So is not aikido a watered down form of violence? What makes it any diferent from modern contact sports?

Quote:
I agree it is hypocritical to have parents support that and reject MMA. But MMA is real, not choreographed like pro-wrestling, it isn't football, and it isn't hocke
so I would imply that from this that you consider that Pro-wrestling is Okay because it is "not real"?

I have issues with what pro wrestling represents. I have no issue with my son watching UFC. I do have issue with him watching pro wrestling with all the anger, and deception, and violence that it represents real or unreal.

Quote:
However screwed up some parents are as parents, or one-sided the media is against MMA for kids, or MMA, the majority of society as it stands now is against MMA for kids as it is.
As screwed up as some parents may seem, and I agree there are many that don't hold the same values that I do. The U.S. is founded on personal liberties that allow them to be as screwed up as they want to be. I don't believe it is up to us to impose our own sense of values or beliefs.

The only argument that i think you can present is one based on harm. That is, demonstrate that a harm is being done to someone by another. It can be physcial or mental.

If harm is not being done, then government does not have the right to interfere.

No one has presented an argument that holds water based on harm. No studies showing that MMA activities are more or less dangerous than other contact sports.

No studies showing that MMA activities/sports present mental harm more than PG-13 (or some G rated!) movies today.

For every argument presented that says MMA is bad, you can find an example of a permissiable activity that presents the same thing.

So, so far, I have only seen it as an emotional argument.

Legistlation based on emotions, beliefs, or religion is dangerous ground. It allows erodes the civil rights of others.

It is not about the majority or popular opinion, but about civil liberties and rights.

  Reply With Quote