Killing Animals for "Sport"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Marfran
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
athansor said:
Many years ago, before I was vegan, I took a hunter safety course. I never did go hunting, but a person I was dating was a hunter and I wanted to learn about it.

When they described bowhunting, the instructor said that the draw for bowhunting was that people got two hunts for one…the first to find and shoot the animal, and then all the tracking as the animal bleeds out. This was coming from the teachers of this class, and the discussion was that the longer it took to track the deer after it was shot, the more or a challenge and the more fun.

Is that something that has changed now? Do the majority of bowhunters aim for a quick kill so that they no longer have to track the bleeding animal? Just for reference, the course I took would have been about 15 years ago.
Click to expand...
Hunters should always try for the quickest and most humane kill
 
Roaches and rats are off limits to being hunted IF the hunter enjoys the hunt.

[Is THAT what is included in the Ringers’ Rules for Radicals? Can we hunt Ringers?]
 
fultonfish said:
Roaches and rats are off limits to being hunted IF the hunter enjoys the hunt.
Click to expand...
Actually, you can hunt them and enjoy it.

But apparently you must have a need somewhere in there.

So remember…you gotta eat that roach after you crush it.😉
 
bigfootbob said:
??? what? did they do that to you?
Click to expand...
When squirrels get in the walls of a house, they like to chew on the electrics. We had squirrels in the house once, that is the only time we ever took action against them because we didn’t want an electrical fire. My husband shot them, and we tried eating one - it was tasty but a lot of work for not much meat (they were little red squirrels.) Dh put the tails in his fly box so they didn’t totally go to waste.
 
The only thing I see unethical about it is wasteful destruction of a resource - but that can happen just as easily by not hunting.

It is also unethical to burning corn for fuel to create an artificially demand for corn (increasing the price) when there are poor who need that same corn for food. It is also wasteful to not harvest a crop - causing others to suffer because of it.

I will agree masochism is unethical, but for any moral healthy person hunting has nothing to do with getting pleasure out of inflicting pain. To kill for food or kill to protect crops is acting as a steward of creation.

It is easy to feel remorse plowing a field, but it necessary to turn a natural garden into a cultivated one. It is easy to feel remorse when harvesting meat - but ultimately it is the same thing. Environmentalist would rather people starve than the field be plowed - that is worshiping nature rather than the Creator. Vegetarians who try to force others to believe as they do are doing the same thing.
 
hunting for fun is wrong regardless if the animal gets injured because you are killing something unessecarily.
 
Newbie2 said:
Are you implying that most people that torture animals will become serial killers?
Click to expand...
You are reversing the order of what I stated. It was about how most (maybe all) serial killers start. I do wonder now that you mention it, what the others who torture animals become.
 
severus68 said:
You are reversing the order of what I stated. It was about how most (maybe all) serial killers start. I do wonder now that you mention it, what the others who torture animals become.
Click to expand...
OK, just wanted to confirm what I though you were saying.
 
vz71 said:
This fails to account for the difference in what exactly a slave was from the OT timeperiod and the present time.
Slavery today was not the same then. However the morality behind it has always been the same.
Click to expand...
Slavery today? So how different were the OT slaves? What is this morality about keeping slaves that has never changed? Is it a morality or an immorality?
 
Back on topic, I was wondering how the Catholic hunters here reconcile Catholic doctrine on the treatment of animals with hunting for any other reason than to eat or clothe oneself. Is such a thing possible?

If this has been addressed and I missed it, feel free to just tell me the post number and I will search for it.
 
pnewton said:
Back on topic, I was wondering how the Catholic hunters here reconcile Catholic doctrine on the treatment of animals with hunting for any other reason than to eat or clothe oneself. Is such a thing possible?

If this has been addressed and I missed it, feel free to just tell me the post number and I will search for it.
Click to expand...
Anything killed is eaten, and hides are usually sold, so it is not a problem.
 
bigfootbob said:
Anything killed is eaten, and hides are usually sold, so it is not a problem.
Click to expand...
True. Even if the killed animal is left on the forest floor, it is consumed by other critters. And becomes part of them. And then rerecycled again.

Nature wastes nothing.
 
fultonfish said:
True. Even if the killed animal is left on the forest floor, it is consumed by other critters. And becomes part of them. And then rerecycled again.

Nature wastes nothing.
Click to expand...
But humans do. That does not justify anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top