Killing Animals for "Sport"

[fish90]

To play Devil’s advocate, would not the sport be needless because in our society we can go to the supermarket and get meat without going through the possible sin (I do not know) of enjoying tracking and killing an animal.

For the record, I respect hunters. They do great for our animals and I do argue to people that there would not be as many animals if hunting were to stop. (No demand for forests that make money. Sad to say but its true).

God Bless

 

[redrosetea]

To play Devil’s advocate, would not the sport be needless because in our society we can go to the supermarket and get meat without going through the possible sin (I do not know) of enjoying tracking and killing an animal.

For the record, I respect hunters. They do great for our animals and I do argue to people that there would not be as many animals if hunting were to stop. (No demand for forests that make money. Sad to say but its true).

God Bless

Game has no hormones and is a leaner meat…therefor healthier…also in my state many people are out of work…for the price of a hunting license a family can eat many meals

To cull a herd is a good thing…it stops animals from over populating feeding areas that might result in starvation, which is a much crueler death that one clean shot to the heart, where an animal dies quickly

 

[athansor]

Well we take our interpretations of sin from the church not a BB for starters…and there is nothing that scripture speaks of that would make this a sinful act, not in the old or new testament…it is inhumane and that is cruel…and we are not to be cruel to anything…but it is not in the same league as murder

Speaking only in human terms there is nothing wrong with sharing any sort of information…we should all strive to be as kind as possible to all living things…but eating meat or wearing leather will not keep you out of heaven…murdering a baby will…its just not the same

Warning people about cruelty to animals is a good thing to do on any level…but to mix it with breaking the 10 commandments is not correct…when this sort of thing is done it tends to dilute their argument instead of strengthening it…I am sure St Francis wants us all to love God’s creatures as he did

I don’t disagree with you, and I certainly wasn’t trying to equate the acts of abortion and eating meat, just discussing why it is difficult to comment on motivations for an act, when you find the entire act problematic.

 

[redrosetea]

I don’t disagree with you, and I certainly wasn’t trying to equate the acts of abortion and eating meat, just discussing why it is difficult to comment on motivations for an act, when you find the entire act problematic.

Murder is a sin…it is forbidden to us…it will send you to hell…God Himself has forbidden it…there is nothing in scripture about mistreatment of animals sending you to hell…it is just not in the same league on any level

 

[pete_29]

Vegetarians or vegans are not morally superior to people that eat meat. You can put up as many “is this cruel or is that cruel” threads on this forum that you wish, but it will never make you morally superior.

 

[lumenorientale]

To play Devil’s advocate, would not the sport be needless because in our society we can go to the supermarket and get meat without going through the possible sin (I do not know) of enjoying tracking and killing an animal.

For the record, I respect hunters. They do great for our animals and I do argue to people that there would not be as many animals if hunting were to stop. (No demand for forests that make money. Sad to say but its true).

God Bless

So true. Hunters tend to be big into wildlife conservation.

 

[bigfootbob]

(P.S. - I’d be happy to share some very tasteful vegan recipes-]/-] if you are interested! )

Tofu is just not the same as bacon, ham, steak, hamburger, pork chops, chicken, turkey…MMMmmmmm I am be a vegetarian only on fridays (NOT a vegan)

 

[Marfran]

Vegetarians or vegans are not morally superior to people that eat meat. You can put up as many “is this cruel or is that cruel” threads on this forum that you wish, but it will never make you morally superior.

Wow, where did that response come from?? Right out of left field!!

No, but people who eat meat are closer to cavemen.

This thread is about killing animals for “sport,” as opposed to killing them for “meat,” though one can probably pretend one is hunting for the “food” aspect, when one is really motivated by the personal satisfaction and “thrill” of the hunt.

In a “canned hunt” it is pretty hard to look like you are hunting for any “honorable reason.” Canned hunts are often exotic, retired zoo and circus animals.

Hunters often claim to be “conservationists”. In my opinion, this is a way to “paint” the activity a prettier color. Hunters often donate the meat that they kill–for a better public image–not because they care about people, but because they care about the continuation of hunting.

I have to question any “enjoyment” derived from the activity of hunting.

As far as people who have brought up the topic of hunting for “meat”–I think it is healthier to obtain one’s meat this way, as opposed to eating factory farmed meat–and the animal leads a normal life until the point of death–as opposed to an entire life of suffering on a CAFO (Confined animal feeding operation).

Many sportshunters spend more money on equipment, gadgets, clothing, lodging and alcohol, all in the pusuit of a kill–bringing the cost of the meat to astronomical proportions, not seen in any grocery store!!!

 

[Bluegoat]

Murder is a sin…it is forbidden to us…it will send you to hell…God Himself has forbidden it…there is nothing in scripture about mistreatment of animals sending you to hell…it is just not in the same league on any level

I suspect she chose it precisely because she knew most posters would have a very strong aversion to the idea of abortion. For her illustration to be helpful to her point the comparison just needed to be something people found unethical - it didn’t require any other similarities.

 

[Tosk]

Murder is a sin…it is forbidden to us…it will send you to hell…God Himself has forbidden it…there is nothing in scripture about mistreatment of animals sending you to hell…it is just not in the same league on any level

I don’t think she was equating the two acts at all she was just making a point about how good intentions do not make a morally wrong act good. If causing animals to suffer is wrong then it doesn’t matter if your intention is to feed your family a good meal, or simply to enjoy the thrill of a hunt.

 

[aspawloski4th]

Wow, where did that response come from?? Right out of left field!!

No, but people who eat meat are closer to cavemen.

This thread is about killing animals for “sport,” as opposed to killing them for “meat,” though one can probably pretend one is hunting for the “food” aspect, when one is really motivated by the personal satisfaction and “thrill” of the hunt.

In a “canned hunt” it is pretty hard to look like you are hunting for any “honorable reason.” Canned hunts are often exotic, retired zoo and circus animals.

Hunters often claim to be “conservationists”. In my opinion, this is a way to “paint” the activity a prettier color. Hunters often donate the meat that they kill–for a better public image–not because they care about people, but because they care about the continuation of hunting.

I have to question any “enjoyment” derived from the activity of hunting.

As far as people who have brought up the topic of hunting for “meat”–I think it is healthier to obtain one’s meat this way, as opposed to eating factory farmed meat–and the animal leads a normal life until the point of death–as opposed to an entire life of suffering on a CAFO (Confined animal feeding operation).

Many sportshunters spend more money on equipment, gadgets, clothing, lodging and alcohol, all in the pusuit of a kill–bringing the cost of the meat to astronomical proportions, not seen in any grocery store!!!

It’s a traditional thing for men to like to hunt Are you for anything tranditional at all?

 

[Bluegoat]

Well, I have some thoughts about hunting that define what I think about “sport” hunting.

Hunting as a practical activity has a clear end - animal products to be used. The Church has always taught that this is, in itself, fine and good. Of course it is possible to do it in an immoral way like other activities. (Around here I have seen people who target endangered animals, don’t bother to go after shot animals that run away, or use lead shot in areas that it isn’t allowed.)

Many people also enjoy the activity. There is always a feeling of satisfaction with a job done well and increasing skill. Many people enjoy the contact with the outdoors.

And at a deeper level, I think it is an activity that connects us to our basic human needs in a way that can be very fulfilling - just like working in a garden to raise food can be. It is a kind of direct interaction with our place in creation that something like working in an office does not really compare to. Both people who raise their own food and hunt say that it helps them connect with themselves and God, and I think that is what it is about. (Although I wonder about those guys who hunt with thousands of dollars worth of technology and equipment - it seems to be rather like trying to hunt in the office to me.)

So where does sport hunting fit in? And by sport hunting I would say hunting where the animal is not used in any way by the individual doing the hunting, or far surpasses the needs of the person, or even simply becomes an end in itself.

To me, this is separating something that is intrinsically joined, trying to get that feeling of accomplishment or connection without the actual end of the activity being met. It is essentially like artificial birth control, or using a vomitorium. After all, how can you get that satisfaction of being part of creation and playing that role without actually using the activity in the way it was meant to be used?

I think as a result, it tends to encourage an unhealthy attitude towards creation and our place in it.

 

[lumenorientale]

Wow, where did that response come from?? Right out of left field!!

No, but people who eat meat are closer to cavemen.

I do have a funny feeling that this statement may represent, in some way, how you actually feel.

This thread is about killing animals for “sport,” as opposed to killing them for “meat,” though one can probably pretend one is hunting for the “food” aspect, when one is really motivated by the personal satisfaction and “thrill” of the hunt.

And what is wrong with that, as part of it?

In a “canned hunt” it is pretty hard to look like you are hunting for any “honorable reason.” Canned hunts are often exotic, retired zoo and circus animals.

Hunters often claim to be “conservationists”. In my opinion, this is a way to “paint” the activity a prettier color. Hunters often donate the meat that they kill–for a better public image–not because they care about people, but because they care about the continuation of hunting.

I would watch the judgemental tone of that statement. You don’t know what is in their hearts.

I have to question any “enjoyment” derived from the activity of hunting.

Read my first post on the thread, then question me all you want. You will see that I am no sadist. Of course, I and others may turn around and question you about the things you enjoy.

As far as people who have brought up the topic of hunting for “meat”–I think it is healthier to obtain one’s meat this way, as opposed to eating factory farmed meat–and the animal leads a normal life until the point of death–as opposed to an entire life of suffering on a CAFO (Confined animal feeding operation).

Many sportshunters spend more money on equipment, gadgets, clothing, lodging and alcohol, all in the pusuit of a kill–bringing the cost of the meat to astronomical proportions, not seen in any grocery store!!!

And what do you spend money on, Marfran? Care to tell us what your hobbies are, and how much you spend on them? How about the money you may spend on your tofurkeys and soy lattes? And how you expect the average family to afford those rather expensive food items? I’m not being accusatory, I’m just saying that if you want to pick apart what people spend on things, well, recall that if someone follows you around, they could probably pick you apart too.

So you are confirming what Pete said? That vegans and vegetarians consider themselves morally superior to meat eaters?
Most of the vegans and vegetarians I’ve met have not given me that impression, by the way. However, I sort of get that sense from you…sorry to say.
Yes, I enjoy hunting–there is a sport to it. I also enjoy the meat. Am I a bad girl for that? Am I going to hell for it? Is my priest going to hell because he is a life long hunter? Or is he somehow morally inferior to you? Am I?
I hate to get this thread off track, but if you are going to make such statements as you did above, you have to be willing to accept the results.

 

[severus68]

My cousin’s husband is a big-time hunter who recently took a number of trophies during a very expensive African safari. My understanding is that the local natives harvested everything else from the animals that he killed.

I am not a hunter. I do believe in killing animal pests and in hunting for food, but I am not going to get involved in the kind of sport hunting that brings the cost of venison to $50 a pound.

DaveBj

There have been a lot of changes over the years in Africa with regard the use of animals too. The tourist industry brings in much needed revenue and jobs for the locals. Most people are happy “shooting” animals with cameras.

Is it just the cost of meat that bothers you?

 

[severus68]

Vegetarians or vegans are not morally superior to people that eat meat. You can put up as many “is this cruel or is that cruel” threads on this forum that you wish, but it will never make you morally superior.

Sharing opinions and encouraging a lifestyle that would be better for us, the environment is not saying we are morally superior. Only God is perfect. It was not necessary to make this comment. There is no need to be defensive.All of us are with sin too.

 

[severus68]

It’s a traditional thing for men to like to hunt Are you for anything tranditional at all?

We are a long way from the era of the cavemen when men hunted to provide food for survival. If it is a tradition to hunt for sport/ pleasure, it is a tradition that should end.

 

[JoeJetson]

What about sport fishing? What about catch and release? At first glance you would think that the guys who catch and release are gentler, kinder souls. But are they? Many of the fish that they release end up dying anyway from their injuries, a hook too deep, a hook in the eye… They admittedly do not want the fish to eat. They don’t want to clean them. They are fishing for what reasons then, if not to utilize what they catch? Too bad you can’t do that with animals. Shoot them and throw them back into the woods to run again… I guess shooting tin cans or clay pigeons isn’t as much fun as killing something and seeing the blood.

 

[lumenorientale]

What about sport fishing? What about catch and release? At first glance you would think that the guys who catch and release are gentler, kinder souls. But are they? Many of the fish that they release end up dying anyway from their injuries, a hook too deep, a hook in the eye… They admittedly do not want the fish to eat. They don’t want to clean them. They are fishing for what reasons then, if not to utilize what they catch? Too bad you can’t do that with animals. Shoot them and throw them back into the woods to run again… I guess shooting tin cans or clay pigeons isn’t as much fun as killing something and seeing the blood.

sigh…and this is why I usually don’t get involved in these conversations.
But, I’ll indulge one last time…fish released properly do not die of their injuries. Caught in a soft rubber net, not taken out of the water, not handled too much. If a hook is too deep, then the fish must be kept, processed, and eaten. If you really pay attention to catch and release behaviors, you would see this.
Again, I see generalizations and assumptions made from them. I’m growing weary of the polemics. “Shoot them and throw them back into the woods to run again… I guess shooting tin cans or clay pigeons isn’t as much fun as killing something and seeing the blood.” Oh for heaven’s sake! You do realize you are doing yourself and other vegans/vegetarians a great disservice with this silliness. It’s not the blood coming out, it’s the tracking, the pursuit, the chase, and finally–a goal obtained. Then you bring the meat home to share with your family, a way of sharing the experience, and you thank God for it all.
So give these polemics a break, please. If you are going to argue that veganism is the right way, then be like Severus and some others here and be rational and reasonable.

 

[Bluegoat]

What about sport fishing? What about catch and release? At first glance you would think that the guys who catch and release are gentler, kinder souls. But are they? Many of the fish that they release end up dying anyway from their injuries, a hook too deep, a hook in the eye… They admittedly do not want the fish to eat. They don’t want to clean them. They are fishing for what reasons then, if not to utilize what they catch? Too bad you can’t do that with animals. Shoot them and throw them back into the woods to run again… I guess shooting tin cans or clay pigeons isn’t as much fun as killing something and seeing the blood.

Yes, there is a mortality rate for catch and release, and it can vary quite a bit depending on the type of fish and care of the person doing the fishing. I hate it when those guys are on tv and you see them man-handle the fish and then release them. Why bother at that point?

I feel a bit for some of these guys - my husband loves to fly fish, but trout are under stress here, so for the most part he never keeps them even when he is allowed, and he is very careful, and brings home any he thinks are too damaged if he can legally. He is making the best of an unfortunate situation. OTOH, it is causing stress and possibly damage to an animal, essentially for his enjoyment. It can be hard in some cases to figure out where the line between using appropriatly and exploiting lies.

 

[severus68]

What about sport fishing? What about catch and release? At first glance you would think that the guys who catch and release are gentler, kinder souls. But are they? Many of the fish that they release end up dying anyway from their injuries, a hook too deep, a hook in the eye… They admittedly do not want the fish to eat. They don’t want to clean them. They are fishing for what reasons then, if not to utilize what they catch? Too bad you can’t do that with animals. Shoot them and throw them back into the woods to run again… I guess shooting tin cans or clay pigeons isn’t as much fun as killing something and seeing the blood.

We are told its the joy of the chase. No joy for the animal there.