Arguments for and against fox hunting

Watch
This discussion is closed.
Ditting Suck
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#21
Report 14 years ago
#21
(Original post by JonD)
The problem is, there are far too many people who are such suckers for stories about fluffy wuffy animals getting hurted. They don't seem to realise that the people telling them these stories have their minds fixed solely on a little fantasy that's been in the back of their head ever since they first donned a Che shirt - hunting down innocent people on the basis of their supposed (a claim hotly contested) privilege in some frenzied violent revolution. A bunch of evil *******s I'd gladly feed to the hounds if times were harsher.
Are you implying that animal rights activists are:
a) all Communists;
b) all murderous;
c) all revolutionaries?
...because if you are then I think you are about to be subject to a significant amount of rage.

(And, while I'm at it, you also seem to be saying that all Communists are murderous revolutionaries, and that all revolutionaries are murderous, which is also going to get you nowhere)
0
JonD
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#22
Report 14 years ago
#22
(Original post by Ditting Suck)
Are you implying that animal rights activists are:
a) all Communists;
b) all murderous;
c) all revolutionaries?
...because if you are then I think you are about to be subject to a significant amount of rage.

(And, while I'm at it, you also seem to be saying that all Communists are murderous revolutionaries, and that all revolutionaries are murderous, which is also going to get you nowhere)
No, because if people were listening to animal rights activists they'd probably also be entertaining the thought of banning Kosher and angling. Perhaps even those lakes of innocent rabbit blood we call motorways.
0
Ditting Suck
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#23
Report 14 years ago
#23
(Original post by JonD)
No, because if people were listening to animal rights activists they'd probably also be entertaining the thought of banning Kosher and angling.
Some would, some wouldn't. I certainly would, and I (fairly obviously) think that this is a perfectly sensible point of view.

I still don't see what it has got to do with 'donning Che shirts'.
0
gas_panic!
Badges: 12
#24
Report 14 years ago
#24
Its the fact that these people get off on seeing a fox ripped to bits thats sickening and the reason it should be banned.
0
libertarian
Badges: 0
#25
Report 14 years ago
#25
Instead of threatening institutions where animal research if involving cruelty at least could have some benefit for society why don't they target the hunting fraternity especially those who are going to carry on hunting.
0
aaronc2
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#26
Report 14 years ago
#26
(Original post by Ditting Suck)
I completely accept that, and I personally advocate the banning of halal and kosher slaughter, as well as the importing of meat slaughtered in such a way, in Britain.

But your using this as an example suggests to me that you agree that inhumane practices should be banned, regardless of whether they are culturally important?
no i don't, because Im liberal on these issues - I think its imporatant to respect peoples customs and beliefs (we certainly shouldnt ban the importing of such meat). I'm merely concerned by the apparent double standards. And I dont thik all those things - witch burning etc. were really an integral part of anyones culture, and anyway - each case should be taken on merit, thats far worse than fox hunting
0
Ditting Suck
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#27
Report 14 years ago
#27
(Original post by aaronc2)
no i don't, because Im liberal on these issues - I think its imporatant to respect peoples customs and beliefs (we certainly shouldnt ban the importing of such meat). I'm merely concerned by the apparent double standards. And I dont thik all those things - witch burning etc. were really an integral part of anyones culture, and anyway - each case should be taken on merit, thats far worse than fox hunting
I would have to disagree that it's far worse than fox hunting, but I accept I'm in a very small minority in saying that and I don't expect you to agree with me.

And no, we shouldn't respect other people's customs if they are offensive and immoral to us. What about, for example, forced female circumcision? That is an important custom in many religions, but few would say it's acceptable.

The problem is that the Muslim and Jewish community put around a lot of unscientific piffle about how humane and painless their slaughter methods are, and people swallow it for fear of looking discriminatory. However, having a law which states everyone has to stun animals before slaughter, except Islamic and Jewish butchers, is to me the very definition of discrimination.
0
aaronc2
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#28
Report 14 years ago
#28
all of the practices you mention refer to humans - as a sophiscticated civilization, we should give rights to human beings, such as not being hanged, or forced to be circumcised etc. but we shouldnt take rights away from people to perform a cultural practice that doesnt harm people - such as fox hunting, and muslim slaughter. Thing is, you and I maybe disgusted by fox hunting, which is our right - and we would, therefore, not engage in such a practice ourselves, but I think it is wrong to prevent other people from doing so, particularly when it involves setting double standards as mentioned.
0
Ditting Suck
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#29
Report 14 years ago
#29
(Original post by aaronc2)
all of the practices you mention refer to humans - as a sophiscticated civilization, we should give rights to human beings, such as not being hanged, or forced to be circumcised etc. but we shouldnt take rights away from people to perform a cultural practice that doesnt harm people - such as fox hunting, and muslim slaughter. Thing is, you and I maybe disgusted by fox hunting, which is our right - and we would, therefore, not engage in such a practice ourselves, but I think it is wrong to prevent other people from doing so, particularly when it involves setting double standards as mentioned.
I see your point, but what about things such as cockfighting, badger baiting, etc., which are seen by the vast majority as wrong?

And anyway, I don't see the distinction you do between accepting pratices we view as immoral if they are commited against animals, but not if they are commited against humans. If, to us, they are immoral, it doesn't matter what they involve - they should be curtailed.
0
Danny the Geezer
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#30
Report 14 years ago
#30
It's rhetorically immoral, and just plain cruel. I hate the sport and it's participants with a passionate bile. It's a rich man's sport and I hate it for that, and as an left-wing animal lover I despise the damn thing.
0
aaronc2
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#31
Report 14 years ago
#31
(Original post by jaydoh)
It's rhetorically immoral, and just plain cruel. I hate the sport and it's participants with a passionate bile. It's a rich man's sport and I hate it for that, and as an left-wing animal lover I despise the damn thing.
But thats techically as bad as saying 'I hate Muslims and evrything they stand for with a passionate bile, therefore we shouldnt allow their practices to continue'. I donbt entirely disagree with you, but Im concerned by the double standards here - once again, thinking something like this is wrong doesnt give us the right to prevent other people from doing it,but we have the right to exclude ourselves from it
0
SuperhansFavouriteAlsatian
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#32
Report 14 years ago
#32
I'm lobbying my MP to put through a private member bill banning the killing of spiders with newspapers.

I don't think it will get through though. Spiders aren't cute enough.
0
zooropa
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#33
Report 14 years ago
#33
(Original post by loose_moose)
hey,
I know this is a subject that has been discussed a lot(!!) but I'm doing it for my French A2 oral, and need lots of arguments for and against it. I'm arguing against it, but need to be aware of all the different arguments the examiner could come back at me with so I can think of how to respond. Obviously I have the main ones like cruelty to foxes / foxes are pests etc, but other ideas would be appreciated! Thanks
I'm in two minds.

As a libertarian, I respect someone's right to hunt. If animals are on their own property, then they should have the right to hunt them.

Nonetheless, I think animals should be protected from harm, legally. Mammals, birds and reptiles are all sentient beings and therefore have the same innate aversion to harm and pain as humans do.

I don't accept the "tradition" argument. It was "tradition" for women to stay at home and cook and look after children. Should all women now stay at home and be housewives? Tradition may serve some purpose, but that doesn't mean tradition cannot be subject to moral scrutiny.
0
Ditting Suck
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#34
Report 14 years ago
#34
(Original post by zooropa)
I don't accept the "tradition" argument. It was "tradition" for women to stay at home and cook and look after children. Should all women now stay at home and be housewives? Tradition may serve some purpose, but that doesn't mean tradition cannot be subject to moral scrutiny.
I agree with you, but I warn you that that argument will get torn apart. Of course, women shouldn't have to stay at home, but the analogy you've made says that there should be a ban on women staying home, which most people would disagree with.

However, see several posts above for numerous examples of why "tradition" is a crap, lazy argument for preserving anything that is now seen by the majority as immoral.
0
zooropa
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#35
Report 14 years ago
#35
My point was that traditions are subject to change and that simply because something is labelled as "tradition" it isn't inherently good or virtuous.
0
Ditting Suck
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#36
Report 14 years ago
#36
(Original post by zooropa)
My point was that traditions are subject to change and that simply because something is labelled as "tradition" it isn't inherently good or virtuous.
Well then I apologise, as that is entirely correct.
0
Lou1616
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#37
Report 6 years ago
#37
Animals, like us, don't ask to be born. They also feel pain and fear. We share the world with animals, to arrogantly expect that humans can do whatever the hell they like with anything which happens to be weaker is wrong. If we are the 'superior' species, surely we are above killing or maiming for pleasure? In my experience, people who hunt are majorly inadequate individuals who use the fact that animals have less legal protection to bully. God help humans if the law changes, sadism is sadism, they just can't legally pick on humans, animals are the coward's target.
0
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#38
Report 6 years ago
#38
(Original post by ExitMusic)
Arguments against ban:

Foxes are a pest i.e. they kill chickens
They are a top of the food chain i.e. they are not eaten by anything else so they will keep being a pest or they will get killed by farmers anyway
That is a very poor understanding of food chains you have their. We are not overrun with foxes. What we do have load of is rabbits, which the foxes eat. I don't think it is true there are to many foxes.

It is a blood sport and is of the same nature as bull fighting. If some chavs attached fireworks to a cat/dog no one would support it but because fox hunting is carried out by upper class toffs it is seen as respectable by many.
0
gladders
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#39
Report 6 years ago
#39
I am not a hunter and am thoroughly urban in my outlook, and whether there's a ban or not does not irk me one way or the other.

However from what I have read, the ban is ineffective in that it doesn't raise the welfare of foxes, but makes it worse for them. Under hunting, most of the foxes were simply scattered from the area, and only a few deaths, which tended to be quick and clean. Now, more are dying, and in more painful circumstances, such as poisoning, trapping or shooting.

As for the 'hunting shouldn't be enjoyable' thing. I wonder what people's view here is of falconry, which is hunting for sport just as much as fox hunting is.
0
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#40
Report 6 years ago
#40
(Original post by aaronc2)
Fox hunting is part of rural English culture, and, in this country, we are so keen on respecting other cultures, but we seem to be disrespectful of one of our own subcultures - I always found this bizarre (although I do think its cruel, but that means that I wouldnt do it, not that I want other people to be prevented from doing it)
I'm not. The Burker is form of oppression. Happy now? I think you will find that most people who oppose fox hunting oppose any barbaric stupid tradition.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

New lockdown - Do you agree schools and universities should remain open?

Yes (12)
57.14%
No (8)
38.1%
I don't know (1)
4.76%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed