Like Jack the Ripper?
- Status
Like Jack the Ripper?
If you're referring to me, what the heck are you on about now?
You haven't responded to any of my posts in this thread..
S
sodthisforfun
No, you're right, sorry, it was BAS's post.
S
sodthisforfun
What's that got to do with bloodsports or enjoying killing animals?
Because if the patient is a Brexer, they are obviously a racist, low life scum sucking animal!!!
Some Brexiteers are undoubtedly racist.
Durhamplumber asked me if I could name any.
I did, a few from this forum.
I ask durhamplumber if he knew any, or could name any. He resorted to abuse after implying that he did not.
Can you name any? Do you know of any?
I don’t know of any but a remainer on here suggested another made a racist comment last week.
There you go. You're in the same place as durhamplumber. You suggest there are racist Remainers, but you don't know of any.
I suggest there are racist Brexiteers, and I can name some of them.
There is a moral philosophical difference.
Raising pheasants until fully grown, then releasing them so they fly up in the air to be shot has a sole purpose. That purpose is the natural flight decisions of a living animal is providing the human with pleasure, ie its a sport, hobby, pastime. The sport is mostly I would say derived from the excitement of a birds direction of flight that the human has no control over, more so than the actual act of killing.
The ethics of that process is that a person is choosing to kill an an animal for a single purpose: enjoyment. Therefore a life is being ended for a trivial reason.
Whether the bird is eaten later on is not relevant to the ethics. Its perfectly possible to eat a pheasant without the releasing, shooting and retrieving element.
Raising an animal to be killed and eaten is a very different ethical discussion. There is no excitement or sport involved in the killing. There is still killing involved, but that does not involve allowing a bird to fly off and then shooting it out of the sky. One can make the case for the ethics of whether we should eat animals at all or the suffering in the slaughter process, but it is different.
Killing animals to reduce numbers is again a different ethical argument.
And the enjoyment of eating meat is again a clear ethical, moral, philosophical difference from gaining pleasure by shooting a bir das it flies away.
The ethical differences between these is as clear as night and day to me. If you want to conflate the ethics of one with another in order to drive your argument, that is your choice.
But by it's very nature, most game is shot in the wild...
Thus is a person eating game as a result of 'sport' (via the butchers) 'ethically wrong'?
I happen to know a couple of people who travel to Africa to kill wild animals for sport...
However they pay handsomely to shoot animals that would be culled anyway - the old or lame...
The money that they pay is recycled into conservation projects that help make sure that healthy animals are protected...
So is that 'ethical' or not?
D
durhamplumber
And improvement on cows arus pie you usually eat
D
durhamplumber
Complete myth
S
sodthisforfun
I had heard about money going into conservation projects, however I don't think the animals in Africa shot are necessarily old or lame.. do you think there's much excitement in just killing and old and lame animal that's had it anyway and not moving much?
It's cruel. It's not 'sport'. There is no sporting chance for the animal against a rifle is there? Completely imbalanced 'sport', an animal picked off from it's own dwindling heard, just as some sicko's trophy, so they can boast about the destruction of a life. Yeah, real brave 'sporting' people who just happen to have cash and a gun.
Remember Cecil? Was injured and then killed some 12hrs later by the same hunter. The pain and suffering, and fear that lion experienced was appalling no matter how much people pay. When is enough enough?
- Status
