The Art of Killing--for Kids

[Crescentinus]

My initial post was “designed” to provoke civil discourse about an important ethical issue–that’s my “agenda.” I hope I’ve done that as best as I could.

Lies!
Your agenda is to convert people into the religion of veganism.

 

[Crescentinus]

Here’s a question.
Since eating meat and plants are now considered unethical, what are supposed to eat?

 

[pnewton]

Here’s one: hunting inflicts suffering, pain and death on sensitive creatures when there’s no need to do so.

Yes, but it does not inflict unnecessary pain or death. All animals die. Most deaths are horrible. They are not allowed to gently pass away in a hospital. Being killed by a hunter is almost as humane as it gets, as opposed to disease, starvation, injury that leads to starvation, eaten alive.

Hunting can either be an activity for building character in children or an activity to build cruelty.

 

[spencelo]

Lies!
Your agenda is to convert people into the religion of veganism.

First of all, veganism isn’t a religion.

Second, I’m simply putting forth my views on a forum where willing participants may want to discuss them – there are a lot, apparently. If my arguments persuade people to my view of things, that’s great. If people aren’t persuaded but nevertheless find what I say to be thought provoking, that’s great too. Now you can stop pretending that I have some hidden, nefarious “agenda,” although from a psychological pov, that’s probably an effective technique to rationalize writing off what I say.

 

[Crescentinus]

First of all, veganism isn’t a religion.

Second, I’m simply putting forth my views on a forum where willing participants may want to discuss them – there are a lot, apparently. If my arguments persuade people to my view of things, that’s great. If people aren’t persuaded but nevertheless find what I say to be thought provoking, that’s great too. Now you can stop pretending that I have some hidden, nefarious “agenda,” although from a psychological pov, that’s probably an effective technique to rationalize writing off what I say.

You do realize that I was being hyperbolic when I said “the religion of veganism”, right?

If you wanted debate, then you could have just done so without giving anyone ideas that you’re trying to convert people into veganism. Your posts tend to come across as trying to convert people into veganism rather than wanting to have a mere discussion. In fact, I’ve seen vegans go into discussions without converting people into their lifestyle choice.

 

[spencelo]

Yes, but it does not inflict unnecessary pain or death. All animals die. Most deaths are horrible. They are not allowed to gently pass away in a hospital. Being killed by a hunter is almost as humane as it gets, as opposed to disease, starvation, injury that leads to starvation, eaten alive.

The fact that animals die horribly in the wild is no excuse to deliberately inflict suffering and death on them. That’s like saying: “It’s okay to assault and bully X because, if I didn’t, someone else would have assaulted and bullied X more.”

Hunting can either be an activity for building character in children or an activity to build cruelty.

“Building character” doesn’t justify inflicting pain, terror and death on an animal–in fact, teaching kids it’s okay to harm animals doesn’t build much “character” at all, in my view.

 

[spencelo]

You do realize that I was being hyperbolic when I said “the religion of veganism”, right?

I actually didn’t, given your ridiculous charge of my hidden “agenda.”
Crescentinus;9799492:

If you wanted debate, then you could have just done so without giving anyone ideas that you’re trying to convert people into veganism. Your posts tend to come across as trying to convert people into veganism rather than wanting to have a mere discussion. In fact, I’ve seen vegans go with discussions without converting people into their lifestyle choice.

I’ve put forth arguments, and the conclusions of those arguments lead to veganism. So what? Interact with them, reject them, tell me why you disagree – yes, my big evil “agenda.” I hope everyone recognizes how nonsensical your complaint is.

 

[spencelo]

Here’s a question.
Since eating meat and plants are now considered unethical, what are supposed to eat?

I do not consider eating plants unethical.

 

[spencelo]

Hunting is not against any civil or Church law but seems to be against your law. As many have posted, I think your law is in the minority in both this thread and your blog. I believe you’ll have to go elsewhere to gain support for your agenda. You are upping your post count, however. At this rate you’ll make Forum Master in hardly any time at all. I am finding that it’s futile to reason with people on certain issues.

Are you against animal cruelty? You have to say ‘no’ if you think hunting is okay.

 

[maryjk]

Are you against animal cruelty? You have to say ‘no’ if you think hunting is okay.

Only if you agree that hunting is animal cruelty. Since hunting isn’t cruel, I have no problem saying I am against animal cruelty, but not against hunting.

 

[spencelo]

Only if you agree that hunting is animal cruelty. Since hunting isn’t cruel, I have no problem saying I am against animal cruelty, but not against hunting.

Okay, let’s discuss the meaning of “cruelty.” If I kicked your dog hard, would that be cruel?

 

[pnewton]

The fact that animals die horribly in the wild is no excuse to deliberately inflict suffering and death on them. That’s like saying: “It’s okay to assault and bully X because, if I didn’t, someone else would have assaulted and bullied X more.”

No, it is not. The two are nothing alike. First, animals aren’t people, something most animal rights activist tend to forget. Second, there is nothing in animals that suggests a long life is more desirable. Third, an animal can not be killed twice, as a person can be bullied twice.

“Building character” doesn’t justify inflicting pain, terror and death on an animal–in fact, teaching kids it’s okay to harm animals doesn’t build much “character” at all, in my view.

Your view is not mine, the Catholic Church’s or the majority of humanity. It is just “your view”. I have no objection at all to the vegan crowd and respect their legitimate points. However, I have no respect for vegan activism which attempts to foister on others their opinion. It is none of vegan’s business if another person choices to hunt and teach their kids to hunt.

 

[Crescentinus]

I do not consider eating plants unethical.

You do not consider eating plants as unethical, but there are those who do say that eating plants and meat are both unethical. Hence, me asking that question.

 

[Crescentinus]

I actually didn’t, given your ridiculous charge of my hidden “agenda.”

I’ve put forth arguments, and the conclusions of those arguments lead to veganism. So what? Interact with them, reject them, tell me why you disagree – yes, my big evil “agenda.” I hope everyone recognizes how nonsensical your complaint is.

I love being hyperbolic at times to prove a point.

My complaint is based from experience and analysis. I’ve seen the same types of arguments from militant vegans, and worse. Your argument had been wrecked by the others to the point of sheer recklessness.

 

[pnewton]

Now you can stop pretending that I have some hidden, nefarious “agenda,” although from a psychological pov, that’s probably an effective technique to rationalize writing off what I say.

I do think it is disingenuous to say(from your original post):

Would welcome any thoughts.

and then go about arguing with everyone for those very thoughts they give. I sure won’t trust you next time you post a thread wanting opinions.

 

[spencelo]

No, it is not. The two are nothing alike. First, animals aren’t people, something most animal rights activist tend to forget. Second, there is nothing in animals that suggests a long life is more desirable. Third, an animal can not be killed twice, as a person can be bullied twice.

The form the justification is the same: because bad things would happen to Z anyway, it’s okay to inflict slightly less bad things on Z. Why is that reasoning valid when applied to animals but not humans?

Your view is not mine, the Catholic Church’s or the majority of humanity. It is just “your view”. I have no objection at all to the vegan crowd and respect their legitimate points. However, I have no respect for vegan activism which teaches to foister on others their opinion. It is none of vegan’s business if another person choices to hunt and teach their kids to hunt.

Am I *teaching *to “foster on others” my opinion? Be fair now. I’m putting for my views, which I do not hide, and you are free to accept or reject them – in whatever manner you wish. Stop overreacting and trying to make my posts to being something they’re not?

 

[spencelo]

I do think it is disingenuous to say(from your original post):
and then go about arguing with everyone for those very thoughts they give. I sure won’t trust you next time you post a thread wanting opinions.

What’s your problem with arguing about ideas? Do you have a problem with debate and discussion? If so, then perhaps this thread isn’t for you. If not, then stop complaining. There was nothing disingenuous with what I said, and to suggest otherwise is itself disingenuous.

 

[pnewton]

Am I *teaching *to “foster on others” my opinion?

I editted this post to attempt.

 

[spencelo]

I love being hyperbolic at times to prove a point.

My complaint is based from experience and analysis. I’ve seen the same types of arguments from militant vegans, and worse. Your argument had been wrecked by the others to the point of sheer recklessness.

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion that my argument has been “wrecked” to the point of “sheer recklessness” – obviously I disagree. But there’s no need to cast aspersions about my character by suggesting that I pushing some nefarious “agenda.”

 

[pnewton]

. If not, then stop complaining…

Stop overreacting and trying to make my posts to being something they’re not?

You sure get bossy.