Hunting:Your views?

What if feel empathy yet, find the thrill and enjoyment of the hunt and the kill simply to be greater.

It shows you simply have a passion that is greater than other feelings, not that one feeling is stunted.

I simply don't believe you. I think if you understood the pain, fear and suffering caused to a creature by shooting it to death, you would find the idea of doing so for 'the thrill and enjoyment of the hunt and the kill' to be intolerable. That, or we have fundamentally irreconcilable ways of perceiving the world.

I wonder how you would feel about someone using your views to support hunting the homeless, for example.

I have no problem with hunting, I've done pest control before, but I'd love to have the oppurtunity to hunt game.

I think it is better to hunt for food than to keep them in captivity all of their lives then slaughter them. And at least it shows a willingness to acknowledge where meat comes from, unlike people who pretend meat appears in a supermarket and shut themselves off from how it is produced. Still, I find the idea of posing with an animal with a massive grin rather disgusting.

I could never imagine killing animals for fun. To find enjoyment in killing anything strikes me as critically lacking in empathy.

I understand the fear and pain, ive felt the fear of being killed myself, and ive witnessed the death of others, and greived when I personally took the life of other humans.
I understand that loss and empathy.

However the main thing here is that we are not designed to have that level of empathy for animals and those that do are showing unnatural and restrictive ammounts of an emotiona that is meant to preserve pack strength.

That's why billions of humans shove dead animal flesh into there mouth every day and don't give a ****.
That's why millions are employed in the slaughter of captive animals.
We have little ingrained natural empathy when it comes to animals, especially animals that we want to eat or use.

As it is im not shooting the animal, then pushing my finger in the wound for a bit, kicking it in the ribs for good measure then sitting on it till it bleeds out.

I shoot, if the shot itself didn't do the job, I slit it's throat as quickly as possible, there is no desire to create suffering, I am not showing a lack of empathy.

If anything my empathy is made apparent in my desire to end it's suffering.

I doubt it could be, but I would oppose such a view as it runs contrary to self-preservation of the species.

I don't care for that sort of straw-man argument eitherway.

Why?

Im not hunting it to feed myself, for the price a hunting trip costs me, I could buy three-fold the meat I take from an average hunt.

I hunt because it's a challenge and a hobby, and like anything worth doing that you enjoy, you are proud of your achievements, why shouldn't it be documented?

I believe animals deserve moral consideration as they have the ability to feel pain and have a desire to remain alive. It is therefore wrong to take their life, and that is why I find posing with their dead bodies sickening.

A hobby that involves the suffering of another is not one I can condone.

Doth not the bird devour the worm?
The Lion the Antelope?
The Eagle the Vole?

Why should I be dissalowed from the hunt?

Then why would you want to inflict it on others? Is your enjoyment really worth more than that animal's deepest possible desire to not be shot and experience excruciating pain and anguish before you ultimately kill it? Why?

We're not 'designed' at all. Even if we were, though we would be of a predisposition to act in the way in which we were designed to, it would be a non-sequitur to claim that we should act in that way or that acting in that way must be ethical.

That's completely true (and I hope it will change).

Would that be wrong? If so, why?

Have you not already argued as if your enjoyment for the 'thrill of the kill' completely overrides whatever rights or interests that animal has?

If you honestly cared at all about minimising suffering then you wouldn't be shooting anything, so permit me not to take you quite seriously.

If it's a straw man then please point out where the distinction lies. If it is simply that the homeless are humans rather than some other species then that's just speciesist and oughtn't to be relevant.

If it is because of concerns for the 'preservation of the species': there is absolutely zero risk from shooting homeless people that our species will fail to be preserved.

Doth not the bottlenose dolphin rape? 'Other animals do it' is not a proper moral justification for anything.

I'm a vegan and whilst I have bigger issues with the meat/dairy industry, I do also oppose hunting as a sport. My view? That I could never enjoy death, it would not be fun for me.

I understand that it is enjoyable for you but I don't think that makes it right, I think we as a society are responsible for forming rules and thus laws that are fair and just. Rape, murder, animal abuse, child neglect are obvious misuse of authority and strength, we can argue the negative impacts, but, they are also things that people are capable of enjoying and being proud of.

I am aware that animals being slaughtered for food is part of the food web, it's not unjust, and I think it's perfectly acceptable (as long as it is done humanely). But I think hunting as a sport should be illegal. Whilst culling as a method of conservation is entirely different, it's not done for personal gain, and it's done for the greater benefits of a thriving population (which is usually struggling in the first place due to human interference). I think a society which values life, rejects the notion that killing should ever be done for sport or fun, is a society which upholds values above personal satisfaction.

You presume Animals have rights, rights are a Human concept we give to ourselves.

If Animals can hunt and kill and tourture other animals.
Then I can do it too.

Natural order.

I used the word designed to indicate Evolutionary desires and instincts

It might not be wrong at all.
Though it would show a dangerous trait to enjoy suffering, something which could lead to dangers to other Humans.

What rights?
The Challenge is the aim, suffering is an unfourtunate by-product.

I care about minimizing suffering within the confines of what I set out to do.
Taking a life carries with it an unavoidable aspect of suffering, I personally try to minimize that suffering within the restrictions of still carrying out the Hunt.

Why not?
Bias towards our own species is biologically ingrained withinus, it's a natural predisposition.

A taking of a human life harms the species, because it reduces one from the ranks.

I certainly do presume it! Rights exist as an implication of our vulnerability to suffering. For the same reasons we recognise them as existing for us they exist for animals.

You would seriously get your morals from chimpanzees?

Then there was not even any intention for us to have the desires that we have. There's literally no reason for us to act in accordance with them other than that's where our bias lies.

Now you're saying it might not be wrong to torture animals? What on earth do you find wrong?

The right of any conscious creature not to be killed and subjected to abject suffering in the name of 'fun'. That you don't recognise that right is disturbing.

I can only imagine a torturer giving the same argument. "But I don't cause more suffering than is needed! Suffering is an unfortunate by-product of my profession."

What is natural is not the same as what is right. Do you follow all that is biologically ingrained within you?

I expect these protestations would not hold up well in a court of law - "But Judge, it was biologically ingrained within me; it was my natural predisposition to do it!"

This doesn't sound like you talking. Evolution is competitive in nature. By lessening the competition you should be thrilled at your genes getting an increased opportunity for propagation.

Doth not the bird devour the worm?
The Lion the Antelope?
The Eagle the Vole?

Why should I be dissalowed from the hunt?


Take it your not a fan of Boxing either >.>

What a peculiar leap of logic.



I would get them from wherever I will, i'm not naive enough to think there is some universal tick list of what's good and bad.


That's a good enough reason.


This and that, writing a comprehensive list may take a while.


That you do is silly.


And indeed it is.


Yes actually, as long as it doesn't cause me more harm than good.


It might not.

Good job were talking about killing animals here, and not going to court.



Already got that sorted.

Homeless people are hardly "competition"

Unless you know..that's what "your" into...then by all means, find a nice cardboard box and ...do whatever it is you do.

What gives you the impression we are a soceity that values lifes?
More specifically animal life.