Are you serious? Hunting is immoral? Why are you not writing about drinking, abortion, and pre-marital sex? Those are true immoralities. 2-faced people like you are what is wrong with this world. Quit playing God and mind your own business. Do something good for this world instead of pointing fingers and falsely accusing others of immorality.
Joseph:
Of course I'm serious. Are you? People making love to each other without a state-issued license is immoral according to you, but killing and torturing sentient beings for the fun of it is moral. That seems backwards to me, but I'd never engage in an unmitigated personal attack on you by calling you two-faced. Does that strike you as moral conduct?
Please tell me how objecting to the torturing and killing of animals is "what's wrong with the world". That seems quite a stretch to me. Do you seriously think that if more people enjoyed inflicting pain and death on others the world would somehow be better?
Reality tells a different story. Studies have shown a correlation between children who abuse animals and later adult criminal behavior. Any desensitizing to the pain and suffering of another opens the door to devaluing other human beings, and hence to committing atrocities. That is why my site and my writings have always emphasized empathy. If you feel empathy for another, you will no longer think it "fun" to inflict pain or death upon them.
You have the opinion that premarital sex and abortion are immoral. Would it then be fair to accuse you of "playing God" and "pointing fingers at others" when you express these opinions? Then is it fair to accuse me as you have for expressing my opinion?
I already do a lot of good for the world, thank you very much. You don't know me: you don't know the hours and dollars I spend volunteering for various causes, or supporting people coming our of the Watchtower cult, etc. You have no business making such accusations against me.
--Steve
What justifies the "2-faced" or a "hypocrite" label is that you are taking morality and perverting it how you see fit. Morality is not defined by you or I. It defeats the purpose of the existence of the idea behind morality to think that each person can decide what is moral and what is not. God has defined morality. Read your Bible. God put animals on this earth for man to use for food and clothing. That was intended. Are you a vegetarian? If not, there is another reason you are a hypocrite. Do you not think these animals suffer death before you get a chicken leg or a steak on your dinner table?
I simply love educating the ignorant, so here goes…
"Please tell me how objecting to the torturing and killing of animals is "what's wrong with the world". That seems quite a stretch to me." – Calling hunting immoral is a stretch. Saying that hunters "torture" animals is a stretch. What is wrong with the world today? People like you who don’t know how to use divine guidance through the word of God which clearly tells you what acts are true immoralities. Premarital Sex, abortion, and drunkenness are clearly described as moralities. In this same divine book, it tells you how these animals were sacrificed (killed) to God in the old days and they got no use out of these animals that they sacrificed. They were given as an offering to God. They were also used for food. God put them here for us to use for food and clothing, which are 2 of human life’s necessities. If you don’t believe in the divinely inspired word of God you have no business preaching anything about morality. If you do, then you are just simply ignorant, or trying to impose your will on others. You have absolutely no right to "fornicate" against your creator. Simply referring to it by a prettier term ("making love without a license"), shows how ignorant you are of what true immorality actually is. You say killing an animal is immoral, but killing a human baby is not? Yes… you sir, are what is wrong with this world. There would be far less violence and crime in this world if people actually obeyed God and knew the difference between morality and immorality. One day, those people will wish they had listened. That day is coming.
"Do you seriously think that if more people enjoyed inflicting pain and death on others the world would somehow be better?" – Again, this statement is showing your ignorance. Why do you lobby against a topic you know absolutely nothing about? Have you ever been hunting? Having a child grow up in the woods learning about nature and learning to respect it actually keeps them away from the immoralities of life and teaches good human values. They are far less likely to be out doing drugs, getting drunk, and humping the hunny’s like yourself.
Now for the education…Hunters don’t "inflict pain and death" on others. They "harvest" animals for food, just like a farmer would "harvest" a corn field. You are also killing the plant when you break off those corn ears and mow down the stalks. Plants are living things, the same as animals. Why do you not lobby against the unnecessary torture and suffering of these plants? To the plant, I bet pulling those corn ears feels like someone tearing off an arm or a leg. What you seem to be confused about is that you are a human, whom God gave dominion over the Earth (and the plants and the animals therein). You seriously need to read your Bible, sir. It could save you from Fire and Brimstone one day.
Reality tells a different story. Studies have shown a correlation between children who abuse animals and later adult criminal behavior. Any desensitizing to the pain and suffering of another opens the door to devaluing other human beings, and hence to committing atrocities. That is why my site and my writings have always emphasized empathy. If you feel empathy for another, you will no longer think it "fun" to inflict pain or death upon them. – I simply love this argument. ROFL at ya, by the way. J I would have to agree that children who "abuse animals" tend to be more aggressive and may be more likely to commit crimes later in life. The problem that you don’t seem to realize with using this statement here, is that it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic we are discussing. This is yet another statement you have made in ignorance. YOU DON’T KNOW A THING ABOUT HUNTING, OR ABOUT HUNTERS AND HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT HARVESTING AN ANIMAL. Stop trying to police something that you know absolutely nothing about.
You have the opinion that premarital sex and abortion are immoral. Would it then be fair to accuse you of "playing God" and "pointing fingers at others" when you express these opinions? Then is it fair to accuse me as you have for expressing my opinion? – First of all, that wasn’t my opinion, that was a fact. Secondly, I’m not "playing God." I’m relaying his message. God himself will deal with those that choose to ignore his teachings when their time comes. The difference here is that the Bible speaks of fornication as being immoral, whereas it doesn’t speak this way about hunting. In fact, it states that man was given dominion over the earth, including the animals. God himself commanded people to "kill, torture, sacrifice" (whatever you want to call it) animals in worship to him in the days before Christ. If killing animals is immoral, you are saying that God himself is immoral, while you can practice fornication against his commandments and be considered moral for doing so. This is absolutely the craziest thing I have ever heard in my life. Animals are a gift from God that allow us to feed and clothe ourselves. This was God’s intention. Man and all the other animals were never meant to be equals. That is what you people have to come to understand. The Bible will tell you that God gave dominion over the Earth, to man, (not to man and all other animals). Animals are here for us to use (notice I said "use" and not "abuse", which is what you are accusing all hunters of doing). You on the other hand, are "playing God" because you ignore his command to keep yourself clean from fornication, tell people it is OK to fornicate, then try to tell others that hunting is immoral, when God clearly tells us in the Bible that they are for us to use. And finally, God doesn’t care for your opinion. He will judge you based on what he has said is right/wrong (moral/immoral). Your opinion of morality, won’t have the slightest relevance when you stand before him.
I already do a lot of good for the world, thank you very much. You don't know me: you don't know the hours and dollars I spend volunteering for various causes, or supporting people coming our of the Watchtower cult, etc. You have no business making such accusations against me. – No sir, I do not know you. Nor do I know what good works you do. All I know is that you boast of the bad works you are doing (fornication, perversion of what the Bible says is right/wrong, leading others astray from the word of God, etc). Furthermore, all the good works in the world will not do you any good when that day comes if you have not obeyed his commandments. You kind of sound like those very souls you speak of "that come out of the Watchtower cult, etc", when you brag with statements such as "I already do a lot of good for the world." Read below for what Christ himself says about this:
Matthew 7:21-23
21 Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
I hope you are not an atheist, because if you are, we need to stop the hunting discussion and work on that first. Your soul is more important than our ability to hunt wild game. I’ll assume you are not, for now.
Now for a bit of "Hunting 101". J
I once read an excellent blog post from a hunter trying to get people like you (who lobby to take this right away from us) to understand how the vast majority of hunters feel about "the kill". It can all be summed up with the statement, "Respect for life and that of truly magnificent wild game is what hunting is all about."
Here it is:
--------------------------------------------------------------
One shot one kill. Out of respect for grand game animals, the taking of life is not taken lightly.
If you asked a hunter about killing wild game, chances are you would hear him say he enjoys the hunting but does not enjoy the killing part. Hunting is a very personal thing. Harvesting wild game can be satisfying in many ways. It puts tasteful and healthy fare on the dinner table and provides satisfaction for the age-old need of man to hunt and gather.
There are many parts involved in a successful hunt. There is a lot of planning and practice. The successful hunter must know the habits and habitat of the game to be hunted. He or she must have the right equipment. The rifle or hunting bow should be in good condition and accurate. And there is an unwritten law most hunters follow and that rule is one shot, one kill. This means a humane way must be brought about for the harvesting of game. Most hunters respect game animals and do not want it to suffer.
The mark of a good hunter is a quick kill. It has always been that way. In the back of every hunters' mind is the need to harvest a good species of the game being hunted and to harvest that game animal quickly and cleanly.
Whenever a game animal is killed the hunter usually feels a little pang of guilt even if it is only momentary. The taking of a fine specimen is the result of hard work and planning and well thought out strategy.
Almost the entire measure of a successful hunt is to bring game home. Sure it is nice to get outdoors and enjoy nature, and for many, this is actually the best part of the hunting experience. It is challenging to be able to hunt a wild and elusive creature. But if you return home empty handed the hunt is usually not considered a success. And in order for you to bring the game home you must kill it.
People eat hamburgers and steak and fish by the tons without thinking about the animal that had to be killed to provide such food. It is as simple as that. In order to eat meat, any type of meat, the animal involved must be killed.
Hunting is an enjoyable activity especially if the game is harvested cleanly, and it must be stated here again that hunting is enjoyable. The killing part never is.
There are unfortunately some instances where the game animal is not taken cleanly. This is usually through no fault of the hunter. But nothing is perfect. And when this happens the hunter is usually upset with what has transpired. But by no means did he mean it to happen this way. All he can do is try his best.
No, hunters do not usually enjoy the killing of game. They enjoy hunting and eating the game. Fishing is usually not as controversial as hunting but the fish is hooked and killed and eaten just the same. Do you eat fish?
Respect for life and that of truly magnificent wild game is what hunting is all about. Not the killing. Even trophy hunters do not enjoy the killing part. Man hunts. He has hunted for ages. In order to hunt, game must be killed.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hunters love the animals they hunt (and usually all of God’s creatures) even more so than the "animal rights activists" and so-called "animal lovers". This blog post is written proof, and if you don’t believe that, go read http://www.petakillsanimals.com. I know a lot of hunters, being a member of a state-sponsored hunting web forum, and I know very few who don’t love and respect the animals they hunt such as described above in the blog post. I can honestly say that he speaks for 95% of the hunting population.
If you don’t want to hunt, then don’t. Sit at home and keep your mouth shut and your nose in your own business. Don’t falsely accuse others who love to hunt of being immoral against God for doing it, or lobby against them for legislature that would take away from them, a perfectly normal, as God intended, way to appreciate nature. Then, I won’t have a problem with your "opinion" if you simply keep it to yourself and out of anti-hunting lobbying medium. You don’t see me out there lobbying for them to put you in jail for pre-marital sex, do you?
You know nothing about hunters or about hunting. It’s best that you don’t try to lobby against, or legislate something you know nothing about. Leave the legislation of hunting to the experts. Any wildlife biologist will tell you that if hunting were not allowed, the animals would suffer. Many more would die of diseases and starvation due to over-population. It happens when there are more animals inhibiting a parcel of land than the land can support (produce food/water for). These are the truly the inhumane options. They are much more cruel than death by arrow or bullet. What about your gardens of veggies that you plan to eat if you abolish the killing of animals? All those over-populated herds will be eating the very food you intended to feed yourself with. There is already an abundance of deer in the suburbs, and every now and again, a deer is spotted in an urban city. These animals will do what is necessary to find food, and that includes going into the city, or your own backyard garden. You simply have no idea what kind of Pandora’s box you are trying to open by stopping us from hunting wild game. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.
Hunters and those that currently legislate hunting, know what’s best for the animals that they hunt. They live it with a passion like no other, and they are doing a fine job of keeping the herds healthy through hunting. Turning legislation over to a group of anti’s (such as yourself) who have no idea what is best for them or how to manage them, is not only unnecessary and uncalled for, but it would be downright insane and would provide no benefit to the animal. People like you think they are doing good for the animal by protecting them from a bullet, but since you really have no idea of the biological or ecological necessities of that animal, you have no business deciding what is right or wrong for the animal. I just wish you all would see the reality of the situation and that in all areas there is scientific proof that banning hunting will no doubt hurt hunters (some who rely on game for food), but would also hurt the animals themselves by increasing the spread of diseases and decreasing the amount of available food, water, and shelter available to them.
Lastly, (if you choose to ignore facts) there is too great of an impact that the sport of hunting provides to our economy for legislature to simply shut it down. There is no way you will ever succeed in taking it away from us. Biologically, Ecologically, and Economically, banning hunting is a very stupid and uneducated solution to a problem that simply doesn’t exist ("unnecessary torturing of animals").
Hope you learned a thing or two. J
--Joseph
Joseph:
I knew that a discussion with you would be pointless. From the long rant you sent, it is clear that you haven't even read my writing on the issue: as most of your points are dealt with there: particularly the rationalization of "preventing starvation". I'm not going to type that all out over again in an email, but rather refer you to my site if you really want to know the answers to your defense of hunting. But as to the points not covered there:
What sort of excuse is it to say "we feel a pang of guilt when we kill"? Do you think the animals care? You are ripping apart families with your bullets and arrows and hooks and traps. Do you think I would say, "It's okay for you to shoot me (or my wife or child) as long as you feel a pang of guilt?" The hunter's guilt has no relevance to the issue of whether hunting is moral.
Just because hunters may not enjoy the killing, that does not make the killing okay. Here is an analogy: such justification as you give for hunting could be used as an excuse for child molesting as well: the child molester doesn't enjoy killing the child: the "fun" is in the perusal and everything else leading up to the eventual killing. Besides, he's sorry to have to kill the child in the end, and claims to "respect" and "love" the child more than any children's rights advocate ever could. Do you begin to see that such an argument can in no way justify the activity?
You speak of education: A large part of my site is devoted to education: I am educating people to know that the Bible cannot possible be "the Word of God". It is a largely immoral book which people have used to justify such practices as slavery, the subjugation of women, and animal abuse. Please read "The Cure for Fundamentalism: Why the Bible Cannot be the Word of God" available free on my site. Then you might begin to see that what some men wrote down in ancient times about what they imagined their tribal god wanted them to do has no relevance as to what is or is not moral.
Yes I am a vegetarian. I have been since I reached a basic degree of ethical maturity and began to use my reason and empathy to figure things out (about 16 years old). I gave up torturing and killing fish at the same time.
If I were to impale you in the mouth (or embed a hook in a piece of meat and trick you into swallowing it so that it pierced your gut) and then hauled you around by the hook until you were too tired to put up a fight, would you call that torture? I would. That is why I call fishing (a form of hunting) torture.
I have never advocated "fornication" on my site or "boasted about bad works" I have done. I have never engaged in "doing drugs, getting drunk, and humping the hunny’s" as you accuse me of. It is absolutely none of your business, but I have never had sex with anyone but my wife. I also have never advocated any legislation.
I am not "boasting about my good works". I am replying to a totally uncalled-for accusation from you that said I should do some good work instead of what I am doing. (Implying that I do no good work.) That's the only reason I brought it up.
Before you talk about "people like you" and accuse them of all these things you make up in your head, maybe you should find out who you are taking to and what they stand for. When you start attacking the person rather than fairly discussing what the person has to say, it is evidence that you don't have anything relevant to say about the topic. Such attacks are themselves immoral, and hence your preaching about morality and the "facts" from "God" are suspect.
There is no point in further "discussion" between us. I already knew all of the things you were trying to educate me on: I've already given my answers to them on my website, which you evidently didn't bother to read before writing to me with all of your preconceived notions. I recommend you read the book I referred to above. It is all the help I can give you at this point. It should prove to be an eye-opener for you. (If a verse-by-verse discussion of the entire Bible is too overwhelming, you might also benefit from my short article Rational Compassionate Living also available on my site.)
--Steve
Amazing! Yes, I read your ridiculous babblings on how a 16 year old perverted and twisted (to his liking) the word of God. Do you worship Satan? Or are you just plain Evil yourself? This explains why you try to justify humping the hunnies out of wedlock (sorry, "making love without a license"). That piece of garbage is about the stupidest crap I have ever read. I have been deeply scarred by the most wasted 10 minutes of my life. Since I make about $40 per hour, you owe me about $7 for wasting my time with those lies and propaganda. You have got to be the most ignorant person I have ever talked to in my life. Your main problem is that you don't recognize that animals are not in the same class as humans. They were put here for us to use. Not to be our equals. It is not "murder of a family" when one is harvested. Also, your comment comparing the hunting to child molesting, means that you don't think that a child is as important as an animal. You would rather see a human child molested and killed than a hunter harvest an animal to feed his family. Yes, sir, I was absolutely right. You are a shining example of what is wrong with this world.
The saddest part is that you are too stupid and stubborn for your own good. By the way, scientist have documented that fish do not feel pain, so I'm not sure where you get "torturing fish" at. Again, another less than educated babbling. There will be a day that you will regret your false teachings regarding God's word when you are suffering from fire and brimstone and eternal damnation in Hell if you continue down your current path. False prophets will suffer a great deal more when that day comes, than those they lead astray. I urge you to start reading your Bible. There is no way you read it. My 6 year old is smart enough to understand it. It is not contradictory when you have half a brain and are able to "rightly divide the word" like it says. (By the way, animals can't do this, this is why they are not our equals, and why God gave us dominion over them.) You need to start reading it with an open mind and receive it "as a little child" (like the Bible says) who is honestly looking for truth and not ways to justify his own immorality. Put on Christ as your Savior. Give up sex out of wedlock, and stop promoting fornication, adultery, and the killing of innocent human babies while you are crying about people who hunt animals to feed their families. Hunters should not be the focus of your attention right now. You need to look at yourself first and solve that hypocritical problem, then you can lead others to righteousness. You might benefit from a Bible and a dose of common sense. If my 6 year old can understand it, you should be able to do so as well. Send me your address, and I'll mail you a Bible for you to actually read. I know you haven't read it or you wouldn't say such ridiculous things. I honestly do feel sorry for you.
Joseph:
It is very tempting for me to reply in the same libelous and insulting tone as you. But I will remain civil as you rant (I am used to such outrageously virulent behavior from Christians.)
To me you sound obsessed with "humping". Did I not tell you that I have never engaged in or advocated the types of activities you continue to accuse me of? Are you capable of listening to another human being who might have an opinion different from yours? Then why do you keep harping on something that has no relevance to the discussion at hand? Why do you keep writing me back at all if my replies are refused admittance into your head? I seriously think you should seek counseling.
Fish have nerves. Nerves convey sensations (including pain) to the brain. Whatever back-water "scientist" ever told you differently lied.
Obviously I've read the Bible since my book directly quotes a large portion of it and has my comments on it. It has been read by seminary students with favorable comments.
Are you being purposely obtuse? Don't you know what an analogy is? If you did you wouldn't make the unfounded accusation that I would rather see a child molested than an animal killed. This is your preconceived notion of how people who favor ethical treatment of animals think: it has nothing to do with reality or with what I've said. Scary.
Hell is something that was made up to scare ignorant people into submission to the powers that be. Any intelligent person can see that if they have an open mind -- unless they also still believe in Santa Claus. People who wrote the various books that were eventually collected into the Bible were like you: looking for divine justification for the actions that they knew in their heart were wrong (due to inherent empathy). Anyone can claim "God told us it is alright to do what we are doing". It doesn't make it right: it just makes it pathetic.
Extraordinary claims (such as hell-fire, or God telling us our actions are approved) require extraordinary proof. The Bible lacks all proof of divine origin. Instead it has the stamp of mostly barbaric male authorship trying to justify their barbaric actions. It is not "evil" or "Satan worship" to use one's brain to determine if a claim of divine origin is valid: in fact it is one's moral duty to do so. When you read the Bible for yourself you discover that it is a self-contradictory piece of nonsense filled with grossly immoral actions such as mass murder, raping of virgins, and slavery -- all commanded by the god of the Bible. (By the way, if you want to read about your "humping" -- take a look at your Bible "heroes" such as Solomon (with his hundreds of concubines) and David -- who "did only what was right in the eyes of the Lord" though he had several wives and concubines.) You'll have to do a whole lot better than "God told me so in the Bible" if you ever want to convince anyone in touch with reality that recreational hunting is moral.
Do you honestly think you'll convince anyone that we have "dominion over the animals" because animals can't read the Bible? (If you do decide to seek counseling, don't tell your therapist about this notion right away; she may decide not to release you.) I know adults who can't read (or at least they couldn't before I tutored them in literacy): by your argument we would have "dominion over them" as well. I hope you would agree that this is an immoral consequence of your reasoning, and hence your "reasoning" is invalid. However, since this involves something called "critical thinking", I'm concerned that you won't understand the point -- like all the rest of the points I've already made.
I half suspect that you are playing a joke on me by posing as the ultimate closed-minded Bible-banging hunter. It is funny: but sad if you're really like that, and are bringing up your son to be like you. And, if you're really as you seem, then there is no point in presenting you with a different way of looking at things. So, this will be my last correspondence with you. Don't waste your time pounding out another diatribe against me which has little or nothing to do with what I stand for. Few people would've had the patience to correspond with you this long. Future emails from you will be considered harassment. If you're really committed to being moral, then I trust you'll honor my request and stop writing. Do the moral thing.
--Steve
(True to form, Joseph sent me another email. I deleted it without opening it, and added his address to my spam-bucket list. Chances are he's still venting to the void.)
In retrospect, here's a few things I wish I would've told him:
1. If you claim to be guided in your morals by the Bible, you should focus on:
Ex:20:13: Thou shalt not kill.
In fact, you should paste that verse to your gun: that way it might eventually dawn on you what the actual
meaning of "Hypocrisy" is.
As to sacrificing animals to atone for sins: even later Bible writers came to the conclusion that such
practices were immoral and could never have been something that their god had wanted them to do:
Ps:40:6: Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.
Ps:51:16: For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.
Isa:1:11: To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.
Isa:1:12: When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts?
Isa:1:13: Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.
Jer:7:22: For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
Heb:10:4: For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
Heb:10:11: And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
This represents some of the moral progress humanity has made since those dark barbaric times. Basing your morality on the early Israelite's primitive mind-set is to advocate a giant step backwards in humankind's moral progress. (Yes, they had a few basic things right: I'm not saying they didn't -- what i'm saying is they had some things wrong, and we've learned a little more about morality in the past 2400 years or so.) It has dawned on pople living in the 21st century that we share this planet with our fellow animals, and as non-carnivores we have no right to kill them for "sport".
2. My comments are directed towards recreational hunting: I have never spoken about subsistence hunting (which is extremely rare, especially amongst people who have the time and means to surf the net.)
Your boasting about making $40 an hour precludes you from the excuse of having to hunt to "feed your family."
3. I don't believe that you really think that plants feel pain but fish don't feel pain. It sounds lke you're just grasping at any argument that might excuse your torturing and killing of animals, without regard to consistency. But if you truly are concenred about plants, you should become a vegetarian; as my site explains: a vegetarian diet causes the death of fewer plants than a meat diet (it takes 12 times more grain to feed cattle to produce meat than to consume plants directly.)
4. If you really enjoy getting out in the woods, and the pursuit of an animal, but feel guilty about the killing, then why don't you try what my site suggests (at the end of the hunting video-transcription you found so offensive)? Instead of shooting the animal with your gun, take a shot of it with your camera! That way you retain all of the enjoyment, and you get rid of the part you say hunters don't enjoy, and no one would consider the activity immoral in any way.
|
|