3:03 p.m. - 2004-11-30
Hunting For Arguments
Incredipete has been so lazy lately so my thanks to nightmare54. I haven�t wanted to update twice in one day in SO long. But I just couldn�t wait...
I can listen to any side of an argument and think about it logically enough to see if I�m in the wrong in some way. Or to see if I can learn something I hadn�t seen before. That being said, I�m not wrong here nor have I learned anything new. But I did give it some thought, if that counts for anything.
A fellow diary-lander said he was a hunter. By his own fault however, he opened Pandora�s box for attack by immediately defending himself. As if he were being attacked. As if�
Okay then. Here�s where I land on the hunting issue and believe me, I�ve given it much thought. First though, a brief background check on Mental�s history of hunting.
And begin scene:
When growing up, my father�s parents were raised on a farm in Montana. Hunting is the norm, and is a way of life TO EAT. No over population issues, no I want a pair of fur boots cause they look cool�just a plain necessity to survive. Acceptable to me.
When I was growing up, even though we lived in Los Angeles, my father went hunting every season and our freezer was full of game meat. It never occurred to me something was off here. He enjoyed it, he did it, we ate it. Acceptable to me.
However, something in my personality make up insisted on drawing a line somewhere. When I was given 5 baby chickens for Easter one year, it traumatized me to know we ended up eating them. They did not �retire� to a farm. Same goes for the bunny rabbit I got. My fathers favorite dish is rabbit. Course, he probably liked the taste of dog too for all I know. He�s Satan like that.
A few years ago, I dated a hunter for two years. This guys life revolved around hunting seasons. I ate more game meat in that two years than my entire growing up years with my father. I enjoyed it, the taste and such, but I detested his reasoning behind it, much like the one here. Sorry pal, with sharing points of view come great recognition. And linking.
To say that it is okay to kill something because there is too much of it, whatever the reason, is ludicrous. First, and least important, is the reason itself. We took the land from the animals and now we are doing them a favor by killing them so that they don�t get overpopulated? If that reasoning held water, then why aren�t we doing that to the Iraqi�s? Oh wait�
Second, if something is too populated that we need to kill it and thin it out, and you actually believe that this argument is valid, then I propose the following: In many areas where I feel there are too many hunters, I�d like to have a yearly drawing and hunting day for them. You know, those of us who see it as just plain killing for sport can hunt down those orange wearing rifle toting tobacco chewing targets. I think it sounds fair, and sticks with your argument. Which is silly.
Here�s my advice. Speaking as someone who knows hunters very well. And as someone who can just respect you for your honesty rather than a poor argument to cover up your black soul (just kidding). Just say the truth. You enjoy the HUNT, no matter what type of animal it is, as long as it�s legal I presume. You enjoy all the fun gadgets and toys and guns that come with hunting. You enjoy taking your picture with a dead animal with vacant eyes because his antlers are the BOMB BOY. It�s a sport. So be true to it like one. Yeah yeah, you enjoy eating it. As do I. But I�m sure there�s plenty of hunting you do/would do that you would never eat. Like varmint calling/hunting. Can�t let them overpopulate. And you ain�t gonna eat coyote pal.
Just salute yourself as an Elmer Fudd who doesn�t really care what season it is as long as you get to shoot you�re rifle.
End argument.
I think I may be dropped from his favorite�s list now.
