How Do Feel About Killing Animals

[LadyFeline]

I was looking up some stuff a while back about wild hogs- there are a few around here in BFE Kansas, and I'm thinking of hunting them if I ever get around to it.

Hopefully not for food. Everything I've ever heard about feral hogs says that they taste disgusting. Their meat is greasy, oily, stringy, foul-tasting, and most definitely not your mama's homegrown pork...

[woodsmoke]

To address the main topic of this board, when I shoot a critter- I don't really FEEL anything. It doesn't bother me any more than picking up a chilled slab of plastic-wrapped flesh (killed by somebody else) at the grocery store- why should it?

 

Thanks, Isker. This was what I now realize I should have said.

 

I don't really feel anything when I shoot a game animal either. I do enjoy myself while in the wild, and finding prey does give me a certain sense of satisfaction in knowing I've at least accomplished that much, but it's not any kind of strong feeling.

 

Not sure why I went off into that speech about "coming down from a high." I suppose I just got overzealous in the defense of my position--let passion usurp reason, just as I said would probably happen.

 

I apologize for the unintended deception, folks. I like to hope that one of these days I'll be able to express myself clearly without sticking my foot in my mouth in the process, but until then I'll just have to keep working at it.

[♦ nivek ♦]

woodie..

 

To stalk and properly hunt an animal with any method sucessfully takes skill, moreso patience, and tons of knowledge. Ensuring a swift kill, that results in the rapid removal of its life takes information and practice far beyond buying a huge *insert whatever hunting method or style here*.

 

I have arms and ammunition that used in proper concert are capable of taking any land bourne critter 1000+ meters with one shot. Expensive and heavy? Indeed, not *hunting arms, but are that useful if needed.

 

My more standard arms, long guns are more regulated for fair.chase and ranges less than 100 meters, necessitating that this fumble footed oldman have skills and abilities beyond the typical city.resident.

 

Yeah, I'm damn proud of the scant ability earned and learned to be able to find, track, and eventually take the hunted anmal in question.

 

Still tho, "What do I feel?"

 

Recoil.. and a deep sense of satisfaction in a job well done.

 

Refuse to apologize for feeding self and family. "Food animal murder by proxy" is not in my lexicon.

 

k, BBQ master, L

[♦ nivek ♦]

I was looking up some stuff a while back about wild hogs- there are a few around here in BFE Kansas, and I'm thinking of hunting them if I ever get around to it.

Hopefully not for food. Everything I've ever heard about feral hogs says that they taste disgusting. Their meat is greasy, oily, stringy, foul-tasting, and most definitely not your mama's homegrown pork...

 

LF and all:

 

Wild Russian Boar have been turned loose/allowed to excape into the Central Oregon and Eastern Oregon wilds.

 

Non-native, rapicious and eat everything with no regard to any of the more native fauna and flora.

 

When the hogs are are done in a forest everything up to their snout high is eaten, rooted, and destroyed. The pack of wild pig then move to next area like mamallian locusts and start again.

 

Breed literally like bunnies, with the sows having up to a dozen piglets, all starting the vicious cycle of destruction again and again.

 

I've gone to many ranch and farmsteads, invited, to clean up some well intended fools mess by thinning and eradicating the herds of these eating machines.

 

For the foo-foo bunny huggers who have to insist "each animal life is equal and valuable" I'd invite you to see the damage done to barns, henhouses, stock of all sorts, and the crop grounds that grow your *organic natural living foods*.

 

Maybe when the foo-foo sorts go hungry whilst being literally eaten out of home and table by the feral hogs then they can go and figure a better solution.

 

kL

[LadyFeline]

For the foo-foo bunny huggers who have to insist "each animal life is equal and valuable" I'd invite you to see the damage done to barns, henhouses, stock of all sorts, and the crop grounds that grow your *organic natural living foods*

*cough* Kevin, dear, I think you missed my point...

 

I don't care if someone goes out and kills a bunch of feral hogs. I HATE hogs. So a few less wild porcine meathunks wandering around, the better IMO. Fuck, I'd take down a few myself, if I could hit the broad side of a bloody barn. And that goes for any invader species, really - feral hogs, starlings, Eurasian tree sparrows, rock pigeons, etc, etc, etc...

 

I was just stating that I hoped he wasn't intending to eat the things after he killed them, since by all accounts, they're virtually inedible.

[Dark Helmet]

I don't think I could kill any sentient being... I'm not a vegetarian but I feel that since life is so damn rare in the known universe maybe we should try to promote it instead of destroying it. But then I do enjoy a good steak from time to time. *sigh* I won't lie to myself, we are omnivorous creatures but eating meat and doing the killing are two different businesses. If I had to look into the eyes of every cow before I kill them to make some hamburgers I probably would turn vegetarian or do like everyone does and buy the meat at the market. Anyway...

[Friendly Misanthrope]

I mean in the way that they stop eating anything that came from an animal, but continue to eat plants. Are plants not alive too? Whats to say plants don't feel when you cut them? I love plants, damnit!

 

About eating plants, what is the alternative? To starve? I think I know why people (with a conscience) feel worse about commiting violence against animals than plants, especially animals with more advanced nervous systems: It is because there is more evidence that animals have qualitative (sentient) experience during their life, including the ability to suffer from pain. If given the choice between chopping the limbs off a tree, and chopping the limbs off a puppy, which would you choose.? As for me, I'd chop the tree. I am nearly certain that puppies feel pain, where as I highly doubt (although I guess it is possible) that trees feel pain.

 

Edit: Reading over my post, I saw how something I said might be taken the wrong way: When I put the remark about the conscience thing I wasn't talking about you Athiest Mommy, I was just pointing out there are sick bastards out there who can do cruel things to animals and not bash an eyelash.

[Guest Shiva H. Vishnu]

I've never said that hunting is wrong. I have reiterated several times that I am a meat eater. I accept the food chain whole heartedly, and feel no remorse for my food.

 

Having said that, I will again say that personally I am unfamiliar with the mindset that sees killing animals as a fun leisure activity. I am not unfamiliar with the mindset that enjoys aspects of violence. I play violent as hell video games and I love it. Virtual killing is a hoot. Why? Because nothing actually dies. Nothing feels the fear and horror of being shot and knowing that the end is near. Why do I think that's horrific? I have a pretty good imagination. I can imagine what it must be like for a deer which is bleeding and gasping for air. It doesn't seem like it would be all that different for anything that wants to live, which is everything that lives. But, this isn't a cockroach.

 

When I was 10 I shot a bird with a BB gun. I gues I half expected it to just fly away, a little pissed. But no, it fell dead to the lawn, never to fly again. I cried my heart out. Why? Because ultimately I prefer my birds to fly rather then to die. How lame does that sound? I just know that I couldn't look down the barrel of a gun and kill an animal again, not like that, not without good reason.

 

I understand that venison isn't usually at the local grocery, and for those with a need for venison, there seems only one solution. Fine. Have at it. I'd never vote to outlaw hunting. Obviously it has it's place.

 

I'm just not the guy who pulls that trigger, and I don't think I ever will be, so I don't understand.

[AtheistMommy]

I mean in the way that they stop eating anything that came from an animal, but continue to eat plants. Are plants not alive too? Whats to say plants don't feel when you cut them? I love plants, damnit!

 

About eating plants, what is the alternative? To starve? I think I know why people (with a conscience) feel worse about commiting violence against animals than plants, especially animals with more advanced nervous systems: It is because there is more evidence that animals have qualitative (sentient) experience during their life, including the ability to suffer from pain. If given the choice between chopping the limbs off a tree, and chopping the limbs off a puppy, which would you choose.? As for me, I'd chop the tree. I am nearly certain that puppies feel pain, where as I highly doubt (although I guess it is possible) that trees feel pain.

 

Edit: Reading over my post, I saw how something I said might be taken the wrong way: When I put the remark about the conscience thing I wasn't talking about you Athiest Mommy, I was just pointing out there are sick bastards out there who can do cruel things to animals and not bash an eyelash.

 

That's part of my point though. The problem is trees don't yell and they don't bleed red blood cells. But if you could tell that it hurt the tree in the same way as it hurt a human, or animal (like a puppy) you might rethink cutting it down for food or housing. The truth of the matter is that they are very much alive.

 

btw, I agree. I don't care for senseless killing. The problem there is that its all subjective.

[Dianka]

Not responding to any particular post, just trying to work through what has been a confusing issue for me. I recently decided to become a vegetarian - didn't regret it for a second (although I could see how some veggies go overboard with the whole thing.) It all came to an upsetting end when I went in for a physical two weeks ago and found out I'm terribly anemic. Standard iron pills don't work, if I continued being a veggie I would have to buy expensive pills - $175 w/o insurance per month. So, two weeks later I'm chewing on 4th of July skirt steak and it tastes like an abused slave. Totally disgusting, but my plate was licked clean. My point, before this gets too long, is that I've come to truly appreciate the label omnivore. What is the use of chastising people for being meat eaters? In many ways hard-core vegetarianism is a religion, and the most effective way to convert people is to shame and intimidate them by spilling paint, or calling people murderers. On the other hand, not all veg's and vegans condemn people; it's comforting to know that there are people who loves animals though. If I had it my way, I'd have a few chickens. Walk 'em in the morning. I love chickens They're such sweeties.

 

Hunting doesn't disturb me as much as blindly going to the grocery store for chicken breasts so wildly overgrown they could have come off a Thanksgiving turkey, and being grateful that the consumer doesn't have to kill it's own food anymore. If there is only one reason to respect a hunter, it's because they are not trying to forget about the process that ends in food being on the table. I just want to make one thing clear, I am not talking about people who kill animals just for fur, rugs, mantles, etc. Which animal has lived a better life: one that is killed in the wild, or one that is so fuckin disgustingly huge with hormones and other animals that it's legs collapse under it's morbid obesity? Even if there are people who kill animals just for kicks - the abuse by these people can't compare to the abuse in the process that gives us low cost meat. Personally I'd rather eat a bony chicken than a stressed, plucked out, de-beaked, beaten, repeatedly raped, chicken that - I assure you - was absolutely covered in feces until it hit the shelves at the Jewel. We give up control over what happens to the animals we eat by not hunting. Because people would rather pay a corporate farm to kill their animal as far away from their table as possible, farms can do just about anything they want to, which includes slowly poisoning us, and we'll pay them gratefully because we didn't see the blood being spilled. The majority of animal abuse occurs in factory farms, which thrive because we don't hunt.

[Guest Shiva H. Vishnu]

Rape makes a chicken taste better.

[AtheistMommy]

Rape makes a chicken taste better.

 

 

LOL! What does a pampered chicken taste like? How can you tell the difference?

[Dianka]

Rape makes a chicken taste better.

 

 

 

 

 

 

DON'T RAPE CHICKENS!!!

 

[AtheistMommy]

Rape makes a chicken taste better.

 

 

 

 

 

 

DON'T RAPE CHICKENS!!!

 

[woodsmoke]

I've never said that hunting is wrong. I have reiterated several times that I am a meat eater. I accept the food chain whole heartedly, and feel no remorse for my food.

 

Having said that, I will again say that personally I am unfamiliar with the mindset that sees killing animals as a fun leisure activity.

 

As are most hunters. The kind of person you're referring to is what the rest of us call a sociopath.

 

Iskerbibel and niveK have already explained it as well as I could hope to. There is no active pleasure as most would understand it. The only thing I feel when I take a game animal's life in a repsonsible and ethical fashion is a sense of accomplishment. I don't know any other hunters for whom it's really any different.

 

The idea that a hunter somehow exults in the kill is a myth perpetuated through ignorance and deception. A myth to which, IMO, much of the misunderstanding and contention surrounding the activity can be attributed.

[jjacksonRIAB]

I've never said that hunting is wrong. I have reiterated several times that I am a meat eater. I accept the food chain whole heartedly, and feel no remorse for my food.

 

Having said that, I will again say that personally I am unfamiliar with the mindset that sees killing animals as a fun leisure activity. I am not unfamiliar with the mindset that enjoys aspects of violence. I play violent as hell video games and I love it. Virtual killing is a hoot. Why? Because nothing actually dies. Nothing feels the fear and horror of being shot and knowing that the end is near. Why do I think that's horrific? I have a pretty good imagination. I can imagine what it must be like for a deer which is bleeding and gasping for air. It doesn't seem like it would be all that different for anything that wants to live, which is everything that lives. But, this isn't a cockroach.

 

When I was 10 I shot a bird with a BB gun. I gues I half expected it to just fly away, a little pissed. But no, it fell dead to the lawn, never to fly again. I cried my heart out. Why? Because ultimately I prefer my birds to fly rather then to die. How lame does that sound? I just know that I couldn't look down the barrel of a gun and kill an animal again, not like that, not without good reason.

 

I understand that venison isn't usually at the local grocery, and for those with a need for venison, there seems only one solution. Fine. Have at it. I'd never vote to outlaw hunting. Obviously it has it's place.

 

I'm just not the guy who pulls that trigger, and I don't think I ever will be, so I don't understand.

 

I do understand where you're coming from, but you've been hopping all over the place too. The post that confused me the most was the one where you were basically asking people to admit that they enjoy doing that for the reasons you (not they) stated. Do you really think most people hunt because they enjoy watching animals be distressed for some ego boost, or were you just being facetious? I think most hunters don't want to be cruel. They aim for the head and the heart because they don't want the animal to suffer. Those who miss and get a gut shot, for example, generally feel badly about the suffering they've caused, and they'll track an injured animal for miles just to prevent it from suffering.

 

I just thought you were projecting your reactions onto other people.

 

 

...

 

 

As for vegans and other anti-hunters, I honestly think they've been spoiled too long, and they're just one natural disaster away from compromising all of their "rational" positions. Speaking for myself, I also enjoy modern conveniences, but I can embrace my more base nature when it's necessary, not to mention the fact that the world even today is not entirely civilized. Most people who hold such positions tend to assume that their socioeconomic conditions exist everywhere. In the rest of the world where this isn't the case, they wouldn't last a minute.

 

It's easy for a presumptuous dick to point the finger when they speak from an entirely secure position.

[RankStranger]

For the foo-foo bunny huggers who have to insist "each animal life is equal and valuable" I'd invite you to see the damage done to barns, henhouses, stock of all sorts, and the crop grounds that grow your *organic natural living foods*

*cough* Kevin, dear, I think you missed my point...

 

I don't care if someone goes out and kills a bunch of feral hogs. I HATE hogs. So a few less wild porcine meathunks wandering around, the better IMO. Fuck, I'd take down a few myself, if I could hit the broad side of a bloody barn. And that goes for any invader species, really - feral hogs, starlings, Eurasian tree sparrows, rock pigeons, etc, etc, etc...

 

I was just stating that I hoped he wasn't intending to eat the things after he killed them, since by all accounts, they're virtually inedible.

 

I've heard and read different accounts. Some folks say you can't eat the stuff- others say it's better than domestic pork. Most of these hogs are a cross between a russian wild boar and a domestic hog- some nearly all boar and some nearly all hog, depending on what part of the country we're talking about. I'm sure diet plays a role, too. I've seen some of the hogs that I mean to shoot, and they don't look like razorbacks. Also, this is BFE Kansas, which means these hogs have a practically unlimited supply of grain to eat for most of the year... so I think there's a pretty good chance that these will be tasty. If I ever get around to shooting one, I'll just peel it and see what it looks like on the inside- if it looks and smells ok, it's goin' in the freezer.

 

 

I've never said that hunting is wrong. I have reiterated several times that I am a meat eater. I accept the food chain whole heartedly, and feel no remorse for my food.

 

Having said that, I will again say that personally I am unfamiliar with the mindset that sees killing animals as a fun leisure activity. I am not unfamiliar with the mindset that enjoys aspects of violence. I play violent as hell video games and I love it. Virtual killing is a hoot. Why? Because nothing actually dies. Nothing feels the fear and horror of being shot and knowing that the end is near. Why do I think that's horrific? I have a pretty good imagination. I can imagine what it must be like for a deer which is bleeding and gasping for air. It doesn't seem like it would be all that different for anything that wants to live, which is everything that lives. But, this isn't a cockroach.

 

When I was 10 I shot a bird with a BB gun. I gues I half expected it to just fly away, a little pissed. But no, it fell dead to the lawn, never to fly again. I cried my heart out. Why? Because ultimately I prefer my birds to fly rather then to die. How lame does that sound? I just know that I couldn't look down the barrel of a gun and kill an animal again, not like that, not without good reason.

 

I understand that venison isn't usually at the local grocery, and for those with a need for venison, there seems only one solution. Fine. Have at it. I'd never vote to outlaw hunting. Obviously it has it's place.

 

I'm just not the guy who pulls that trigger, and I don't think I ever will be, so I don't understand.

 

How do you separate eating meat from killing it? To me, if you eat an animal, then you might as well have pulled the trigger. That animal feared and suffered just the same whether you did the dirty work or payed somebody else to do it. I mean- there isn't much difference between murder and hiring a hit-man.

 

 

As are most hunters. The kind of person you're referring to is what the rest of us call a sociopath.

 

Iskerbibel and niveK have already explained it as well as I could hope to. There is no active pleasure as most would understand it. The only thing I feel when I take a game animal's life in a repsonsible and ethical fashion is a sense of accomplishment. I don't know any other hunters for whom it's really any different.

 

The idea that a hunter somehow exults in the kill is a myth perpetuated through ignorance and deception. A myth to which, IMO, much of the misunderstanding and contention surrounding the activity can be attributed.

 

To be fair, there ARE some hunters out there who would describe hunting as a thrill, and who make hunting their primary leisure activity. I don't understand the mindset, but I don't condemn people for FEELING differently about hunting than I do. As far as I'm concerned, other folks have every right to pursue the largest antlers they can find (along with they gameyest meat), and beat their chests bragging about that 12-point buck if that's what floats their boat. It doesn't float mine, and I have every right to think they're a dumbass.

[woodsmoke]

I do understand where you're coming from, but you've been hopping all over the place too. The post that confused me the most was the one where you were basically asking people to admit that they enjoy doing that for the reasons you (not they) stated. Do you really think most people hunt because they enjoy watching animals be distressed for some ego boost, or were you just being facetious? I think most hunters don't want to be cruel. They aim for the head and the heart because they don't want the animal to suffer. Those who miss and get a gut shot, for example, generally feel badly about the suffering they've caused, and they'll track an injured animal for miles just to prevent it from suffering.

 

I just thought you were projecting your reactions onto other people.

 

That's the point I finally came to understand with my last post. There seemed to be confusion on that point, with him (and possibly others) thinking hunters do what they do because it gets their rocks off and us seeing no such experience connected to it. (I don't to speak for you, Shiva. Please correct me if I'm wrong here)

 

As for vegans and other anti-hunters, I honestly think they've been spoiled too long, and they're just one natural disaster away from compromising all of their "rational" positions. Speaking for myself, I also enjoy modern conveniences, but I can embrace my more base nature when it's necessary, not to mention the fact that the world even today is not entirely civilized. Most people who hold such positions tend to assume that their socioeconomic conditions exist everywhere. In the rest of the world where this isn't the case, they wouldn't last a minute.

 

It's easy for a presumptuous dick to point the finger when they speak from an entirely secure position.

 

I think there's a lot of truth to this. Of the few people I've known who've chosen to live as vegetarians, not one of them ever had any close relations with or influence from a responsible hunter--in fact, most of the people they got their "information" from were about as ignorant of the subject as one can possibly be.

 

It's just like people who have never had to depend on welfare or social security saying they're nothing but a huge waste of tax payer money and should be completely done away with post-haste (not to imply they're perfect, but they do serve a useful purpose however badly they may be managed).

 

To be fair, there ARE some hunters out there who would describe hunting as a thrill, and who make hunting their primary leisure activity. I don't understand the mindset, but I don't condemn people for FEELING differently about hunting than I do. As far as I'm concerned, other folks have every right to pursue the largest antlers they can find (along with they gameyest meat), and beat their chests bragging about that 12-point buck if that's what floats their boat. It doesn't float mine, and I have every right to think they're a dumbass.

 

This is also true. In fact, come to think of it, my best friend in high school was just such a person. He killed and left for waste more game animals (usually out of season) than anyone else I'd imagine I'm like to meet. I always felt kind of bad about it but never said anything; looking back on it now, despite my being fairly certain it wouldn't have changed his behavior at all, I wish I would have.

[Vigile]

Not responding to any particular post, just trying to work through what has been a confusing issue for me. I recently decided to become a vegetarian - didn't regret it for a second (although I could see how some veggies go overboard with the whole thing.) It all came to an upsetting end when I went in for a physical two weeks ago and found out I'm terribly anemic. Standard iron pills don't work, if I continued being a veggie I would have to buy expensive pills - $175 w/o insurance per month. So, two weeks later I'm chewing on 4th of July skirt steak and it tastes like an abused slave. Totally disgusting, but my plate was licked clean. My point, before this gets too long, is that I've come to truly appreciate the label omnivore. What is the use of chastising people for being meat eaters? In many ways hard-core vegetarianism is a religion, and the most effective way to convert people is to shame and intimidate them by spilling paint, or calling people murderers. On the other hand, not all veg's and vegans condemn people; it's comforting to know that there are people who loves animals though. If I had it my way, I'd have a few chickens. Walk 'em in the morning. I love chickens They're such sweeties.

 

Hunting doesn't disturb me as much as blindly going to the grocery store for chicken breasts so wildly overgrown they could have come off a Thanksgiving turkey, and being grateful that the consumer doesn't have to kill it's own food anymore. If there is only one reason to respect a hunter, it's because they are not trying to forget about the process that ends in food being on the table. I just want to make one thing clear, I am not talking about people who kill animals just for fur, rugs, mantles, etc. Which animal has lived a better life: one that is killed in the wild, or one that is so fuckin disgustingly huge with hormones and other animals that it's legs collapse under it's morbid obesity? Even if there are people who kill animals just for kicks - the abuse by these people can't compare to the abuse in the process that gives us low cost meat. Personally I'd rather eat a bony chicken than a stressed, plucked out, de-beaked, beaten, repeatedly raped, chicken that - I assure you - was absolutely covered in feces until it hit the shelves at the Jewel. We give up control over what happens to the animals we eat by not hunting. Because people would rather pay a corporate farm to kill their animal as far away from their table as possible, farms can do just about anything they want to, which includes slowly poisoning us, and we'll pay them gratefully because we didn't see the blood being spilled. The majority of animal abuse occurs in factory farms, which thrive because we don't hunt.

 

Excellent points. You've probably changed my views on this subject somewhat with your arguments.

[jjacksonRIAB]

It's just like people who have never had to depend on welfare or social security saying they're nothing but a huge waste of tax payer money and should be completely done away with post-haste (not to imply they're perfect, but they do serve a useful purpose however badly they may be managed).

 

Not that this is relevant, BUT

 

I do believe promoting welfare is a good thing. You and I just differ in how it is promoted. Without a doubt, Americans are the most generous people in the world. Did you know that American individuals donate vastly more money to good causes than all of the US businesses combined?

 

As far as welfare is concerned, I am reminded of a Buddhist tale about generosity. What happened in this tale is that the Buddhists desired to be totally selfless, so one day they decided to give all of their money to a person who was really down on his luck. He was a drunk and very unfortunate man who lived in their town. They presented him the gift of charity and he became a wealthy man overnight. The next day they went to greet the man they had "remade", only to find out he had used the money to spend the night drinking and subsequently died of alcohol poisoning.

 

The fact remains: thirty percent of people in prison were on welfare at the time of their incarceration. I think individuals are smarter with their money, and they know to give it to the people who truly honestly deserve it. The government has different standards, and quite often they make the same mistakes as our Buddhist friends above. I can count on the fact that people who know each other are in a better position to gauge where their generosity can be used for the betterment of an individual more than I can on a government that hasn't the time for such things.. If I were to choose between giving charity to a person who was just ruined by some freak occurrence, or was down on their luck, and someone who made no attempt to right themselves and instead sat on the couch all day watching TV, I would choose the former. Government makes no distinction between those two people.

 

As for social security, in Chile they had a SS program similar to ours, and they still have it -but one day they decided to remove coercion from the equation and allow private retirement accounts to enter the market. 93% of the population switched to a private retirement account.

 

I have no problem with government collecting funds for such programs as long as they're voluntary. Hong Kong has a similar deal with universal healthcare and I think it may promote competition in the private sector, which is not a bad thing at all.

 

I think that represents a non-zero sum solution that everyone can be happy with. I can find nothing wrong with it.

 

As for hunting, I myself have never hunted. As far as actions are concerned I am in a neutral position, but where principles are involved I think it's fine for someone to speak personally about hunting and in terms of their individual choice. I've noticed a lot of non-hunters seem intent on ending it for all hunters, whereas I have yet to see a single hunter suggest that all non-hunters start hunting. Once again, we have the people wanting to impose their ideals on society and the individuals not imposing on anyone. Sure there are exceptions. Some take an individual stance, saying "I will not hunt because I have moral problems with it" -that's fine, and I can totally respect that. The ones who go on the attack about it, however, are the very moralists who bother me, because their idea represents an unwarranted imposition on an individual who has done them personally no grave injustice, just like the fundies who wish to redefine the world in terms of their worldview, regardless of whether everyone shares it or not -I wish they would just mind their own business.

 

This government was not created for the majority to impose its will on the minority -it was made to protect The People's rights to interact freely and voluntarily with others in society.

 

I can see on its face which institution is voluntary and which is coercive, therefore I do not need to partake of the coercive form to know which is wrong, just as I don't need to have had been a slave to know that slavery is wrong.

 

Giving is right, but not under every circumstance. With government, it doesn't matter. All you do is fill out your form and get your money guilt-free, even if there is a reason to feel guilty.

[Bongo]

Found a chipmunk with a broken leg once. I put it on a flat stump and as hard as I could slammed a log onto it. I felt bad, but thought it was necessary. At least it worked.

 

Also, while driving, I noticed a cat hopping around frantically after it had been partially run over by the car ahead of me. I tried as hard as I could to finish the job, but missed.

 

Everyone I told the cat story to thinks I was a monster for trying to kill it. (So I stopped telling after 2 people). Well, i wasn't a monster, i was trying to do the right thing. However, these people are also the type to take an injured animal to the vet and pay to get it fixed (not that there's anything wrong with that), so maybe they have a point.

[LosingMyReligion]

Found a chipmunk with a broken leg once. I put it on a flat stump and as hard as I could slammed a log onto it. I felt bad, but thought it was necessary. At least it worked.

 

Also, while driving, I noticed a cat hopping around frantically after it had been partially run over by the car ahead of me. I tried as hard as I could to finish the job, but missed.

 

Everyone I told the cat story to thinks I was a monster for trying to kill it. (So I stopped telling after 2 people). Well, i wasn't a monster, i was trying to do the right thing. However, these people are also the type to take an injured animal to the vet and pay to get it fixed (not that there's anything wrong with that), so maybe they have a point.

 

Now try that with a human and you'll be cuffed and stuffed so fast your head will spin.

 

I would have just taken the wounded animals to a nearby animal Hospital or rescue...but that's just me.

[LadyFeline]

Everyone I told the cat story to thinks I was a monster for trying to kill it. (So I stopped telling after 2 people). Well, i wasn't a monster, i was trying to do the right thing.

No, doing the right thing would have been to catch the cat and drop it off at an animal shelter. There, they could've taken care of it and made sure it got adopted out to a good home, or put it down humanely (ie: not leaving it to die a slow, painful death, half-crushed in a ditch or on the side of the road.)

 

There wasn't anything you could do for the chipmunk, and it's extremely doubtful that anyone else would have done anything more than euthanize it. But trying to run over a cat that could possibly have been helped and healed (if it was hopping around, then it obviously wasn't injured that badly, probably no worse than a couple of broken bones) was just fucking idiotic.

[RankStranger]

Yeah, I wouldn't go around repeating that story about the cat. It doesn't make you a monster... just wasn't one of your brighter moments. Myself, I would've just kept on walking/driving in both cases (the wife probably would've made me stop for the cat if she was along, though- she has a soul unlike me. )

 

I originally addressed this question to Shiva, but I'm gonna re-ask it. I'd be interested to hear answers from anybody who can't/won't kill an animal, yet still eats meat:

 

How do you separate eating meat from killing it? To me, if you eat an animal, then you might as well have pulled the trigger. That animal feared and suffered just the same whether you did the dirty work or payed somebody else to do it. I mean- there isn't much difference between murder and hiring a hit-man.

 

 

I love chickens They're such sweeties.

 

Are you serious? Chickens are nasty critters... they'll peck each other to death. They're only slightly smarter than insects... and you wouldn't believe the stuff they'll eat. I think them chicken farmers ain't cruel enough!

 

Um, just kiddin' about that last part.

[Guest Shiva H. Vishnu]

How do you separate eating meat from killing it? To me, if you eat an animal, then you might as well have pulled the trigger. That animal feared and suffered just the same whether you did the dirty work or payed somebody else to do it. I mean- there isn't much difference between murder and hiring a hit-man.

 

Are you really comparing the killing of food to murder? Even I haven't done that.

 

The answer to your question is something I've said many times in this thread. It's not the fact that my food had to die in order for me to eat it. I do feel for animals at times, but really to me the issue is about the person and not the animal. I personally feel bad when I kill an animal, or I did when I have done it accidentally in the past. Those experiences, for me, have made the sport of hunting a puzzlement because I wonder why others don't feel this way when they kill an animal.

 

If the world were thrown into chaos and I had to hunt to survive, I would do it, and I might even become very good at it, but unless I needed to eat I wouldn't be out there killing animals for the fun of it. It's not fun to me. It is decidedly dysphoric. Im sure that my perspective is as befuddling to you as yours is to me.

 

Let's say, just for the sake of shits and giggles, that in the future, some catastrophe makes it so the only source of food is other humans. Even in that situation, no one is going to fault you for killing if that's the only way you can survive. But, if your pantry is stocked with Soilent Green and you can get a thick human tenderloin down at the grocery, your neighbors might rightly start to look at you funny when you, every other weekend or so, hunted one of them just for the fun of it, just for the thrill of the hunt and the satisfaction of a job well done. You compared hunting to human murder first. Not me.

 

If you hear anything I have just said, please let it be that I dont have any problem killing animals for food. If I have to say that again I'm gonna shit my pants.