15 Sep 04
Pro-hunting demonstrators today stormed into the house of commons in britain as a law banning it was being discussed
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=584199&section=news
The protesters say if hunting is not banned the population of wolves will increase and then farmers will have to shoot them anyway.They also say that this has been a part of culture of britain from over 300 years.
Is this justification enough to continue that barbaric sport.What is the value of animal life.Is human intelligence justification for placing a higher value on human life compared to animal life.
If it is so does it imply that a human whose brain is deranged has the same value as a animal.Does it imply that in human society itself intelligent peoples life is more valuable than others.Arent we
being unjust ?.
The demograhic profile of animals which can be domesticated is increasing while animals whose various body parts are useful as human accessories are becoming extinct.Is'nt this an unhealthy trend?
15 Sep 04
2 edits
Originally posted by druidravithis has been discussed to some extent in another thread:
Pro-hunting demonstrators today stormed into the house of commons in britain as a law banning it was being discussed
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=584199§ion=news
The protesters say i ...[text shortened]... n accessories are becoming extinct.Is'nt this an unhealthy trend?
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?id=14132
but you ask some very interesting and important questions that relate to our species.
i'll post what i did in that other thread as far as opinions on this matter goes:
i think the fox has an opinion too.
so did sir george bernard shaw in descibing foxhunting:
The unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible.
(the quote is also attributed to oscar wilde and noel coward, apparently)
glad it is finally banned. so are the foxes, i'm sure.
in friendship,
prad
15 Sep 04
Originally posted by druidraviWow, 10,000 folks gathered in support of fox-hunting. The obvious question: What's wrong with the British?
Pro-hunting demonstrators today stormed into the house of commons in britain as a law banning it was being discussed
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=584199§ion=news
The protesters say if hunting is not banned the population of wolves will increase and then farmers will have to shoot them anyway.They also ...[text shortened]... body parts are useful as human accessories are becoming extinct.Is'nt this an unhealthy trend?
15 Sep 04
Originally posted by druidraviI did not know that there were wolves in brittain ?! Is this realy true ?
The protesters say if hunting is not banned the population of wolves will increase and then farmers will have to shoot them anyway.They also say that this has been a part of culture of britain from over 300 years.
Is this justification enough to continue that barbaric sport.What is the value of animal life.Is human intelligence justification for placing a higher value on human life compared to animal life.
Well anyway.
I think that we all place a higher value on human life than on animal life, intelligence may be the reason, looking out for your self and your species may be an other.
If you assign the same value to animal and human life - then you're eighter fooling your self or indeed a very special person.
It may be the case that some of you are vegetarians because you think of animal wellfare - I think thats a great reason.
But do you ever fly - if you do then remember that far more birds than people are killed by planes. We could continue with cars. Or rural development. Or medical researce. Some way or an other we all benefit from human lives and interests beeing put over those of animals.
Does that then mean we should not think of animal wellfare ? No ! But lets get things in perspective.
15 Sep 04
Originally posted by ScheelThe only wolves in Britain are either in zoos or posting as part of the pack on RHP.
I did not know that there were wolves in brittain ?! Is this realy true ?
Well anyway.
I think that we all place a higher value on human life than on animal life, intelligence may be the reason, looking out for your self and your species may be an other.
If you assign the same value to animal and human life - then you're eighter fooling your self or i ...[text shortened]... that then mean we should not think of animal wellfare ? No ! But lets get things in perspective.
I think he means foxes.
I think I've made my take on the whole issue clear here before. I'm opposed to making it illegal.
I feel that if people want to hunt they should be allowed to.
with one wee catch...
If you're busy hunting for ANYTHING that's not for on the dinner table, ANYBODY is allowed to hunt you at the same time.
It might sound a little cruel. But really you're just making the hunt even more exciting for the hunters (for they themselves may be slain or knocked from their horses by cricket bats). I'm sure they'll thank you for it in the long run.
15 Sep 04
Originally posted by ScheelI agree that for a human being , a human being is of more value than an animal.Darwins survival of the fittest explains that.Once we were competing for survival with the other species for survival.Then whatever was necessary for survival we had to do it.
[
I think that we all place a higher value on human life than on animal life, intelligence may be the reason, looking out for your self and your species may be an other.
But now we are in a place to play the role of mother nature itself. All other species's survival is dependant on the role human being plays.Either we can drive into extinction a species or we can recreate it by cloning.
When we are no longer competing for survival with them killing them deliberately makes no sense.You might shoot a tiger if it is going to harm an human being for then survival of the fittest instincts kicks in .But killing them for fun or for its skin etc could be avoided.
Well as we have great power we can act with more responsibility.
And well sorry for the wolves typo I meant foxes.
15 Sep 04
Originally posted by druidraviI kind of guessed that about the wolves, but I just had to ask. 😉
I agree that for a human being , a human being is of more value than an animal.Darwins survival of the fittest explains that.Once we were competing for survival with the other species for survival.Then whatever was necessary for survival we had to do it.
But now we are in a place to play the role of mother nature itself. All other species's survival is ...[text shortened]... power we can act with more responsibility.
And well sorry for the wolves typo I meant foxes.
I think that you got a very good point about having to think differently about animals now that we are not in direct competition with them. But note that my point still remains, namely that we to a great extent exploit animals that posses no threat to us, only because it suits us for various reasons.
Should we completely stop exploiting animals - I dont think so.
I wear leather boots in the winter - what about you ? Through my lifetime I will have worn enough boots to deliberately kill a cow.
I buy grain for my bread - its grown on fields that occupy land that for 300 years ago were forrest and home for a lot of animals.
15 Sep 04
Originally posted by Brother EdwinBurning Witches is a tradition as well, as is getting children to work up chimneys. Society moves on. Things which were once thought harmless and acceptable are now not so.
For christ sake its a tradition and fun!!!!!!!!!!!! Do any of you actually know anyone who does it?
Since when has anyone cared about a fox? What next? A ban on fishing?
Has anyone heard of natural selection?
Nobody says foxes don't need to be controlled, but not by being torn to bits by a pack of dogs.
