Cecil the lion's killer revealed as American dentist

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimmyG88
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The cattle and other animals raised for slaughter in this case are for the purpose of food and products useful to human survival. The Catechism makes the distinction…
Could you point out where the distinction is made. If a ranch raised cow is slaughtered and eaten, how is that different from a ranch raised elk is being killed and eaten?

I didn’t see where the CCC made the distinction between the species and\or the method used.
 
The cattle and other animals raised for slaughter in this case are for the purpose of food and products useful to human survival. The Catechism makes the distinction…
The catechism is slient on the subject of hunting but others have answered this already:

catholic.com/quickquestions/is-there-anything-morally-wrong-with-hunting-deer-for-sport-as-opposed-to-hunting-out
I’m dreading you responding that Americans include killing for an individuals pleasure as a necessity of human life. That is a unique attitude that comes out of extremist America to justify too many deathly activities. it has no place in the global conversation.
Killing comes in many forms beyond just slaughter for food. While typing this I zapped a mosquito with my battery powered trap. He’s in mosquito heaven now.
Killing creatures that are threatening the welfare of humanity is permitted by the Catechism and … frankly, common sense. To hunt down a creature of any sort and kill it for the soul purpose of pleasure is morally wrong and an officially recognised sign of a future psychopathic serial killer.
So you’ve appointed yourself an authority on both theology and psychology. Interesting.
The Catechism limits the right to kill animals to service of human survival. The pure pleasure of purposely taking a life is sick and it’s even sicker to celebrate it.
No, it doesn’t. It is not a matter of survival for the pope to wear leather shoes. Vegetarians will tell the pope that he doesn’t need to eat meat to survive.

The enjoyment of hunting is simply one example of the enjoyment of life. There is more to life than mere survival. The Catholic church does not teach otherwise.
 
No, it is not “merely” my opinion. The entire theology department where I teach agrees and teaches what he writes, and it’s a Roman Catholic university. What Dr. Allman wrote is conversant with Catholic teaching. I teach five days a week, and my lesson plans have been approved by the department head who has two PhDs.

And, you must have missed it, but I also quoted the word of God - Sacred Scripture - Colossions 1:20 and Romans 8. Jesus restored ALL CREATION to God, not just humankind. It was foretold by the prophet Isaiah in Isa 11.6-9. It’s in the Bible, Catholic Bible. It’s not something I pulled from thin air. I’ve given those sources almost since the beginning, so I’ve been following what the moderators want.

It is the OTHERS who have FAILED to support their view that Jesus only restored humankind. They offered NO EVIDENCE but their own opinion. The Moderator Warning, while meant for all, seems to me to apply more to them since they are the ones who offered no evidence whatsoever.

Now, unless you want to argue with the word of God, please drop the subject. This is a thread about Cecil.

Sirach, there is such a thing as “graduation.” I’ve been a TA for some years and upon graduation received a promotion. My specialty is the historical Jesus. I teach Christology courses, primarily, and some NT courses. As one who teaches Christology, I have to be conversant with the Christology of both the HS and the NT. No one drives me anywhere. I live about .05 miles from campus. There also exists such a thing as “physical therapy” and I was in physical therapy for a little more than a year. Last month I switched therapists and medications and do much better. I still ride an exercise bike for two hours each day as part of that physical therapy. I can’t walk long, long distances like I used to , but I’ll work up to it. I did not know my private life needed so much updating on a board that’s not about me. The “Lily Bernans” on Global Penfriends you linked to is NOT ME. There are other people with the name “Lily Bernans,” though I grant it’s not common, however my own mother and grandmother and one of my aunts are named “Lily Bernans.” That is not my age, and the other information is not applicable. I don’t know when I would ever have time to write anyone anything. People can believe me if they want or not believe me. It makes no difference to me and does not impact my life, but this is the last personal question I answer.

To bring the thread back on topic, Bubba, I do believe that Palmer broke the law in Zimbabwe, but if they find that only the guides and the licensing agency were to blame, I think people should lay off Palmer. If he truly didn’t know he was killing a protected animal, then I don’t see how he can be guilty.

I still can’t stand hunting and don’t consider it a sport, but I guess it’s necessary at times to thin the herds. I’m just such a big animal lover and have such a soft spot for them, even the ones that would kill me if I got near. However, I’m also a realist and fair. It’s entirely possible Palmer didn’t know he was killing a protected animal. I didn’t know about Cecil, but then, I’m not a hunter. His death saddens me, but if Palmer is innocent, I certainly don’t want to see an innocent man in prison. Prisons are for the guilty. I’m confident the true facts will come out in the days ahead. The fact that the agency had its license to issue permits revoked says it does bear at least some of the guilt if not all.
This becomes about you when you make up doctrine. At which school did you graduate and teach?
 
The cattle and other animals raised for slaughter in this case are for the purpose of food and products useful to human survival. The Catechism makes the distinction…

Respect for the integrity of creation

2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity.195 Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man’s dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.196

2416 Animals are God’s creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory.197 Thus men owe them kindness. We should recall the gentleness with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals.

2417 God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image.198 Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.

I’m dreading you responding that Americans include killing for an individuals pleasure as a necessity of human life. That is a unique attitude that comes out of extremist America to justify too many deathly activities. it has no place in the global conversation.

Killing creatures that are threatening the welfare of humanity is permitted by the Catechism and … frankly, common sense. To hunt down a creature of any sort and kill it for the soul purpose of pleasure is morally wrong and an officially recognised sign of a future psychopathic serial killer.

The Catechism limits the right to kill animals to service of human survival. The pure pleasure of purposely taking a life is sick and it’s even sicker to celebrate it.
Nailed it. 👍

A little off topic:

I once heard that the God of the Old Testament made St. Augustine slightly ill as he read the Bible - don’t know if that is true or not but I’ve been there myself, especially with the animal sacrifices.

Here’s a great quote (don’t know who this person is; I just love the quote).

“Could a being create the fifty billion galaxies
each with two hundred billion stars
then rejoice in the smell of burning goat flesh?”
― Ron Patterson

Each to his own I guess. I see no reason why a God that allows six million people to die in ovens would have a problem with hunting…not sure I like where that takes us though.
 
Yes, this spat of publicized killings are all by US citizens. Is there something barbaric about us? They used to say that about the Germans. And I agree it is sickening. A sort of cultural glorification of violence. It’s hard to deny. I used to wonder about that when you look at how we handled the Native Americans so aggressively and degradingly vs. how the Canadians did it or even the British / French in their territories in the same time period. Fortunately we are not all like that. But I am not sure that suggestion is entirely just a myth or negative stereotype either.
It’s high time countries just started banning Americans from entering their countries.
 
I think a good part of the time the motivation is mixed. Yes, most deer hunters eat the venison, but the hunt itself is usually the big motivating factor nowadays. And yes, the trophy “racks” too. But in their case, it’s a good thing they do it for whatever reason, because deer easily multiply to a point where they are all half-starved and spread deadly diseases among their number.

Clearly, some hunting of big game is permitted in Africa. In some places, it’s probably best for the game and the people that it happens. I don’t know whether that was the case with “Cecil the lion”, but it certainly isn’t unheard of to thin big game animals while simultaneously providing a cash source for the locals.

When it serves such purposes, it’s hard to think of it as cruel. When lions get old and can no longer defend themselves, they’re usually killed by other lions or by hyenas. As between that kind of finale and being shot, there’s not much to be desired in the former.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m completely on board with culling as I’m originally a country girl myself. My grandfather and uncles at different times, have culled kangaroo, wild boar and rabbits out of necessity since I can remember. We are also aware of those who want to exploit that natural permission to kill… for the thrill. There are a lot of very focused laws here that recognise that phenomenon in human beings. It isn’t something to be taken lightly or celebrated. Psychiatric literature specifically identifies thrill killing of animals as a common denominator in subsequent serial killers.

The types of characters this Walter Palmer represents aren’t that interested in the traditional facets of hunting like tracking prey which involves the uncertainty of finding any… or the value of the kill to humanity (since lots of lions are bred in Africa for the sole purpose of trophy hunting). It makes a normal person ask what else is there. Here we equate it to the confusing and still shocking case of Chris Lane, one of our young expats. What was the reason for his death? It was simply for the thrill. That’s a confronting phenomenon because even the lowest of low normal lowlife has some vague reason for killing another apart from just the pleasure of seeing a living creature squirm in the throws of death.
 
Could you point out where the distinction is made. If a ranch raised cow is slaughtered and eaten, how is that different from a ranch raised elk is being killed and eaten?

I didn’t see where the CCC made the distinction between the species and\or the method used.
If a cow is slaughtered and eaten and her lovely hide enjoyed as a floor mat… praise be to God. If a ranch raised elk is slaughtered and eaten and her hide used for a cushion… praise be to God. If a lion is raised not to be eaten or to be used for the welfare and work of man… simply for the lustful ecstasy of a person, that is an offense to the dignity in this creature of God.

CCC 2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly.
 
It’s high time countries just started banning Americans from entering their countries.
:rotfl:

Henry David Thoreau is American. From Walden (Higher Laws):

There is a period in the history of the individual, as of the race, when the hunters are the “best men,” as the Algonquins called them. We cannot but pity the boy who has never fired a gun; he is no more humane, while his education has been sadly neglected. This was my answer with respect to those youths who were bent on this pursuit, trusting that they would soon outgrow it. No humane being, past the thoughtless age of boyhood, will wantonly murder any creature which holds its life by the same tenure that he does. The hare in its extremity cries like a child. I warn you, mothers, that my sympathies do not always make the usual philanthropic distinctions.

Such is oftenest the young man’s introduction to the forest, and the most original part of himself. He goes thither at first as a hunter and fisher, until at last, if he has the seeds of a better life in him, he distinguishes his proper objects, as a poet or naturalist it may be, and leaves the gun and fish-pole behind. The mass of men are still and always young in this respect. In some countries a hunting parson is no uncommon sight. Such a one might make a good shepherd’s dog, but is far from being the Good Shepherd. I have been surprised to consider that the only obvious employment, except wood-chopping, ice-cutting, or the like business, which ever to my knowledge detained at Walden Pond for a whole half-day any of my fellow-citizens, whether fathers or children of the town, with just one exception, was fishing. Commonly they did not think that they were lucky, or well paid for their time, unless they got a long string of fish, though they had the opportunity of seeing the pond all the while. They might go there a thousand times before the sediment of fishing would sink to the bottom and leave their purpose pure; but no doubt such a clarifying process would be going on all the while. The Governor and his Council faintly remember the pond, for they went a-fishing there when they were boys; but now they are too old and dignified to go a-fishing, and so they know it no more forever. Yet even they expect to go to heaven at last. If the legislature regards it, it is chiefly to regulate the number of hooks to be used there; but they know nothing about the hook of hooks with which to angle for the pond itself, impaling the legislature for a bait. Thus, even in civilized communities, the embryo man passes through the hunter stage of development.

I have found repeatedly, of late years, that I cannot fish without falling a little in self-respect. I have tried it again and again. I have skill at it, and, like many of my fellows, a certain instinct for it, which revives from time to time, but always when I have done I feel that it would have been better if I had not fished. I think that I do not mistake. It is a faint intimation, yet so are the first streaks of morning. There is unquestionably this instinct in me which belongs to the lower orders of creation; yet with every year I am less a fisherman, though without more humanity or even wisdom; at present I am no fisherman at all. But I see that if I were to live in a wilderness I should again be tempted to become a fisher and hunter in earnest. Beside, there is something essentially unclean about this diet and all flesh, and I began to see where housework commences, and whence the endeavor, which costs so much, to wear a tidy and respectable appearance each day, to keep the house sweet and free from all ill odors and sights. Having been my own butcher and scullion and cook, as well as the gentleman for whom the dishes were served up, I can speak from an unusually complete experience. The practical objection to animal food in my case was its uncleanness; and besides, when I had caught and cleaned and cooked and eaten my fish, they seemed not to have fed me essentially. It was insignificant and unnecessary, and cost more than it came to. A little bread or a few potatoes would have done as well, with less trouble and filth. Like many of my contemporaries, I had rarely for many years used animal food, or tea, or coffee, etc.; not so much because of any ill effects which I had traced to them, as because they were not agreeable to my imagination. The repugnance to animal food is not the effect of experience, but is an instinct. It appeared more beautiful to live low and fare hard in many respects; and though I never did so, I went far enough to please my imagination. I believe that every man who has ever been earnest to preserve his higher or poetic faculties in the best condition has been particularly inclined to abstain from animal food, and from much food of any kind. It is a significant fact, stated by entomologists — I find it in Kirby and Spence — that “some insects in their perfect state, though furnished with organs of feeding, make no use of them”; and they lay it down as “a general rule, that almost all insects in this state eat much less than in that of larvae. The voracious caterpillar when transformed into a butterfly … and the gluttonous maggot when become a fly” content themselves with a drop or two of honey or some other sweet liquid. The abdomen under the wings of the butterfly still represents the larva. This is the tidbit which tempts his insectivorous fate. The gross feeder is a man in the larva state; and there are whole nations in that condition, nations without fancy or imagination, whose vast abdomens betray them.
 
I don’t know the dentist, I wasn’t for the hunt, etc. He might be an all right guy, or a jerk. I can’t see why one second is wasted on this story, though, when there is an abundance of human suffering and other, more pressing, evils in the world.
 
The catechism is slient on the subject of hunting but others have answered this already:

catholic.com/quickquestions/is-there-anything-morally-wrong-with-hunting-deer-for-sport-as-opposed-to-hunting-out

Killing comes in many forms beyond just slaughter for food. While typing this I zapped a mosquito with my battery powered trap. He’s in mosquito heaven now.
You killed the mosquito because it is attacking you and they cause serious disease. You didn’t hunt it down and skewer it with something to watch it squirm and die for no reason whatsoever.
No, it doesn’t. It is not a matter of survival for the pope to wear leather shoes. Vegetarians will tell the pope that he doesn’t need to eat meat to survive.
You didn’t read the Catechism entry I posted…

2417 God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image.198 **Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. **They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.
The enjoyment of hunting is simply one example of the enjoyment of life. There is more to life than mere survival. The Catholic church does not teach otherwise.
When the Catechism has listed legitimate reasons for killing animals such as food, clothing, science… it is now up to you to show where the Catechism endorses thrill killing. To the majority it comes to them through reason, but you need to show something in Church teaching if you want to reject natural reason on the issue.
 
You killed the mosquito because it is attacking you and they cause serious disease. You didn’t hunt it down and skewer it with something to watch it squirm and die for no reason whatsoever.
No, I killed it because it was annoying me. I enjoyed hearing that zap!

Nor do hunters kill for no reason whatsoever. Nor do they kill in order to watch it squirm.
You didn’t read the Catechism entry I posted…
That’s been posted and discussed several times already. And most times I have replied with:

catholic.com/quickquestions/is-there-anything-morally-wrong-with-hunting-deer-for-sport-as-opposed-to-hunting-out
When the Catechism has listed legitimate reasons for killing animals such as food, clothing, science… it is now up to you to show where the Catechism endorses thrill killing. To the majority it comes to them through reason, but you need to show something in Church teaching if you want to reject natural reason on the issue.
The Catechism is not an exhastive list of satsifactory reasons for killing animals, or anything else for that matter. I don’t see ending annoyance on the list, for example. It’s up to you to show that what the Catechism does not permit is prohibited.
 
If a cow is slaughtered and eaten and her lovely hide enjoyed as a floor mat… praise be to God. If a ranch raised elk is slaughtered and eaten and her hide used for a cushion… praise be to God. If a lion is raised not to be eaten or to be used for the welfare and work of man… simply for the lustful ecstasy of a person, that is an offense to the dignity in this creature of God.

CCC 2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly.
Where you aware the Zimbabwe requires (by law) that the meat of all hunted animals be given to a governmental food bank.

That is what would have happen to Cecil.

So yes, the animal was eaten and that was known before the hunt. In fact, the knowledge would have been that the meat from this animal would be given to the poor.

So how does that factor into the CCC?
 
Wait a minute here. I think chimpanzees are hijacking the CCC!
 
I don’t know the dentist, I wasn’t for the hunt, etc. He might be an all right guy, or a jerk. I can’t see why one second is wasted on this story, though, when there is an abundance of human suffering and other, more pressing, evils in the world.
We are stewards of God’s creation, we shouldn’t forget that though I agree the story is being overemphasized.

This morning on my “bing.com” news, I saw a hunter, a woman in this case, with a Zebra she bagged. That is indeed, horrible.

It wasn’t right then, but I can see when Africa was first discovered, perhaps, there were some big game hunters, in this day, doing such needs to be studied closely.

After all, there are organizations like duck’s unlimited who though, it is about duck hunting, they are big in conservation I suppose.
 
We are stewards of God’s creation, we shouldn’t forget that though I agree the story is being overemphasized.

This morning on my “bing.com” news, I saw a hunter, a woman in this case, with a Zebra she bagged. That is indeed, horrible.

It wasn’t right then, but I can see when Africa was first discovered, perhaps, there were some big game hunters, in this day, doing such needs to be studied closely.

After all, there are organizations like duck’s unlimited who though, it is about duck hunting, they are big in conservation I suppose.
Yes, I think this sort of thing goes on a lot. I personally am glad it is exploding on the Internet and forcing a lot of people to really think about it in terms of ethics. I see a strong parallel with the whole Planned Parenthood situation. Of course you would think people would step up there, right? Barbarity against their own. Who knows. I hear a number of major airlines will no longer carry trophy hunting remains. I thank God for that and hope someday to wake up, go on the Internet and see that Planned Parenthood is done. God bless. You want a more compassionate world, get out there and do it. 🙂
 
So much for the pretense that this was about poaching or leaving animals to suffer or macho manliness.

usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/08/03/idaho-huntress-africa-safari-facebook-sabrina-corgatelli/31055181/
Women are the ones who actually have the abortions, remember. I have met so many men in my life who put women on a sort of pedestal, above them, as if we are all Mary. It makes me so sad to see that - I wish we were as good and gentle as some of you think. But, sorry, we are just like you, in your worst (and also thankfully best) moments.
 
Yes, I think this sort of thing goes on a lot. I personally am glad it is exploding on the Internet and forcing a lot of people to really think about it in terms of ethics.
Excluding poaching, there is absolutely nothing unethical about killing a zebra, or lion, especially if the meat is going to feed the third world poor.
I see a strong parallel with the whole Planned Parenthood situation. )
You might, but the Church does not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top