But wait that mountain lion has to be wrong right?If you are so grossly offended by being labeled a savage, don't compare your moral obligations to those of animals.
People for a while weren't allowed to hunt deer in several areas of California, and because of that mountain lions had an over abundance of food. They wouldn't eat it all and so children would find roasting carcasses lying near ponds, discarded near trails, or left on the road.Your argument -- that animals require human beings to maintain the ecological balance which allows nature to remain in tune -- is dependant on the idea that human beings have always actively manhandled nature. This is not the case.
Of course, if you're going to judge him for hunting, why shouldn't I judge you for playing a female character? Why shouldn't I judge you for judging people? Really, all I'm saying is stay on the main focus and don't detract into various arguements, denials and slurs.Human society has always relied on people judging others. Our criminal justice system relies on people judging others. As a matter of fact, the death penalty -- something I am sure the conservatives on this board will positively leap to defend -- is reliant on the supposed infallability of people judging people.
It's called a slur, it's a popular tactic in debate. Once you realize you cannot defeat the enemy by attacking the issue at hand, you attempt to bring up other unrelated issues.Kas, as much as I find him to be a far-right religious fanatic, is right.
You're confused, allow me to help.However, that's called condescension, and that's not very nice, either.
You believe a wild animal to be of equal importance, if not more important than, a human.God loves all of his creatures, I'm sure. Some, though, he loves -- to KILL! Ha ha. Anyway.
And yes, Kas, I would call all life equally important.Well that's sort of stupid, Drayson. You realize that merely by existing, by sitting on the internet and typing such malformed arguments, you are killing animals? That every second you exist in your air conditioned home, you destroy more of the environment, consequently killing more animals? Strange how you persist in it. Evidently you are not above possessing these luxuries at nature's expense.
Who gives you the right to decide that all life in inferior to your own, and you may kill as you please?While I may not agree with sport hunting, as I consider it barbaric and ultimately pointless, sentience alone gives human beings the right to consider themselves superior life forms. Animals can suffer, and this means that purposely causing them suffering is immoral -- particularly when it's for our amusement.
And yes, Kas, I would call all life equally important. Certainly, we slaughter animals for food... which is exactly why hunting is unncessary. Animals have already died to feed you, you're just killing more of them.
Downloading music is theft, or more properly, counterfeit. You're taking the hard work of many people for free.
Killing helpless, wild animals with doe eyes and cute ears is being a good steward. As Theren said, we have destroyed their habitat, and the predators that normally hunt them. Therefor, we must take up the role of the predator, and keep the population in check, as it would normally have been.
If we do not keep the population in check, we will promptly have a bloated deer population on hand (much like we had this year), which will lead to numerous problems. Not the least of these potential problems being a higher risk of disease running rampant through the deer community and problems for the farmers.
The state regulates the amount of deer killed per year, and they make money by selling permits to ordinary citizens. It's a win win situation for them, they make money and they don't have to hire hundreds of state hunters. It's a win win situation for me, because I spend twenty-seven bucks and get seventeen quarts of canned deer meat. It's a loose-win situation for the deer, for while some may die, the rest will have a better chance of surviving naturally because there will be a surplus of food available for them.
In short, we're here, and we have a responsibility. Not fulfilling that obligation would be negligent, which goes against my moral and religious principles.
Kas, answer me this: Who gives you the right to decide who lives and who dies? Who gives you the right to decide that all life in inferior to your own, and you may kill as you please? Who gives you the right to "mantain control" over a population that, in nature, should be able to fend for itself (and only can't because of you)?
While I may not agree with sport hunting, as I consider it barbaric and ultimately pointless,
If a deer matters as much as you or I, then does a cat? A mouse? An ant? A microbe?
Kilam, I never attacked Kas' opinion on stealing. He's allowed to have an opinion, as are the rest of us.
What you are missing is the fact that he is still a hypocrit
, which is what I said. And the point you've ignored throughout this "debate".
It is not attacking Kas' character, or his opinion, and is certainly not "slur" because I never told him he was wrong for stealing. The issue is not unrelated, because if has always been the issue at hand.
Kas. Did you know that thousands of chickens are killed each year in slaughterhouses?
How would you feel if there was an animal higher than you in the food chain, and they lost all respect for you and began to slaughter you wholesale?
Remember the saying, how did it go? Something like do unto others as you wish to be done upon you? Something like that.
