I was performing my occasional masochistic ritual of watching the O'Reilly Factor tonight, and he had a segment with a "sportsman" who was trying to explain the difference between hunting and dog fighting.  This was in response to the latest in the Michael Vick fiasco, where Stephon Marbury of the Knicks has now expressed support for Vick saying:

"I think we don't say anything about people who shoot deer or shoot other animals," the Knick point guard told Capital News 9, an Albany TV station. "You know, from what I understand, dogfighting is a sport. It's just behind closed doors.

Let's just say that the sportsman that O'Reilly had on didn't do a very good job of explaining the difference.  O'Reilly obviously doesn't like dog fighting, and doesn't like Michael Vick, and so was tossing this guy some softballs, but the whole thing left you wondering... exactly what is the difference between hunting and dog fighting?  They both involve animals dying for the entertainment of people.  Why is one considered heinous and one considered noble tradition?

I for one had a very visceral reaction to the descriptions of dog fighting.  I can't describe how awful the horrible things that they do during training and during the fights make me feel.  And yet... why is it so hard to put into words the difference?  I can only come up with one reason.

Dogs are companion animals, and deer are not.  For the same reason that many people (including me) would never think of eating horse meat, but don't shy away from a hamburger.  Dogs are loyal companions.  They trust us, befriend us, look to us for kindness, and return it in more ways than can be expressed in words.  Doing what these people do to them for sport betrays that sacred trust that we have had with our dogs for thousands of years.