Animal Activists have gone too far

Do I have to repeat myself?

 

Well, I definitely would consider it good all around. How could you not? Breaking down the barriers between the classes, foxes get off easy. Win-Win.

I mean, what's the number of humters in comparison to the people of UK who this would be good for? You gotta do what's good for your country in the broad spectrum of things.

 

I'm not exactly sure how outlawing fox hunting is going to break down class barriers.

 

Ask yourself:

Who is fox hunting?

Who is now putting a stop to it?

 

By that token, why not outlaw streetball? I mean, only one class of people plays streetball for the most part, the lower class. Are the middle and upper classes being discriminated against by these ballers? Should we outlaw such activities to break down class barriers?

 

Whoa, I didn't say I was advocating it.

I just pointed out what really going on.

 

whoops, my bad. It kind of sounded like you were advocating it, but sorry.

 

There are more than one renewable resource from which to make clothing. I would probably love to be wearing furs in the winter instead of cotton. But I think it's wrong to do unless you've killed the animal yourself and not just for the fur.

"We" are not rulers. We are a part of the land, the animals, each other, everything.

My morality is what I base all these opinions on.

 

I don't think breaking down class barriers has any significant part in the the outlawing of fox hunting.

 

of course not.

 

while I don't really agree with the idea of killing an animal just for a pelt(fur),it has been going on for a long time.But then again,how is the pelt going to be of any value after dogs have chewed the hell out of it.There are people out there who still make a living off of fur trapping,or at the very least,supplement their income with it.It's their right to do so.Ever wonder why you need a license to hunt or fish?because it fundsland/animal population studies to come up with the number of animals in an area compared to how many animals the area can support.this is how they determine how many animals a hunter/trapper is allowed to take in a season.It also pays the salaries of the men and women who uphold these laws.Actually,if you look at a little history(here in the U.S. at least)outdoorsmen were the founders of the conservation movement.The whitetail deer was nearly extinct on the east coast for a long time.Now deer popultions are up,duck & goose populations are up.Hell,even bald eagles are making a tremendous comeback.You wanna talk about animal rights?Fuck that.lets talk about human rights..What gives ANYONE the right to tell another how to make their living,or get their food?

 

Hey man I aint telling anyone how to live their life, just posting my opinions.

 

Animals in the fields, animals are killed in the fields by the millions along with billions and trillions of insects.

 

This is correct.

I'm glad to see that you do your research on the website of a kids show. The last 65 million years huh.....I don't think I need to read anymore....ok I did, and it got much worse.

 

Like ones that don't kill all those animals I mentioned above?

Let see here, so are you advocating that in order to kill an animal we should live like American Indians and use everything from the animal? Back to the hunting and gathering days is that it?

Of course we're part of it, is the king not part of his kingdom? I don't think we're kings over nature by any means, but surely you're catching my drift here.

So your morals command that it is much better for an animal to starve to death or die slowly and painfully from sarcoptic mange instead of that quick, humane death at the hands of a predator such as the human?

And now that I've brought that up, what of the hawk and the coyote who eat animals while they're still alive? I mean they basically chew them to death, isn't that against your morals?

 

Thats a problem with the industry, not the source.

Fur is not a sufficient renewable resource. It can't grow it's resource back like a cotton plant because it's DEAD. Now, if you sustained it (like cotton, or cattle for meat for example) it would be a bit of a difference. But look at how these industeries treat the animals. Pretty poorly, in many cases. It's tortureous, really. Also, we have much more efficient sources now for clothing, so where's the need?


And no one is saying that to kill an animal you have to be an indian. Don't be so trite. If and when you can bring a good argument to the table please do so. Until then, realize that your opinion is not going to be the same as others.

 

*slapping forehead*

uh huh and what are you gonna do to fix it? I presented a workable solution, you offer nothing.

Animals have babies. Wait cotton plants don't die?? You need to look up the word renewable.....

You should follow the discussion, and do just a little bit of research on the topic of animal rights because, as of right now, you have not offered anything to this thrilling discussion.

Tell me Sera Michele, what good argument have you brought to the table? (please be specific)

 

I'm sorry...I made changes to my post before you posted those quotes.

When I said fur is not a renewable resource, I was talking about the fur when foxhunting. Usually the foxes are ravaged by dogs.

Fur is off the topic of this thread, however. It's about banning foxhunting. I am not opposed to the killing of animals, but I am opposed to the senseless killing of anything. Sport or not. I even take bugs out of my house instead of squashing them. Thats a little ont he crazy side, I'm aware, but just the way I am I guess

 

Funny the little edit message didn't show at the bottom. Anyway answer the post if you like; if not do some reading.

This is an evolutionary discussion just like any other.

 

Says who?