mistermack wrote:Gallstones wrote:
I'm for harvesting wildlife for food.
Unlike yourself, I give a toss about them both.
I'm not criticising, just saying I don't get it.
I don't really give a toss about anything, except my own friends and family, and the extinction of species.
Everything else is just my opinions, not emotions.
So a few zoo animals being killed doesn't bother me, unless they were incredibly rare species, in danger of extinction.
I'm not against harvesting wildlife for food, so long as they are not species in decline, heading for extinction.
I just think it's immoral to do it for fun. I used to love fishing. I don't fish any more, but I would if I needed the food, and the species was not under threat.
I find it odd that you say you give a toss about wild animals, but are ok with killing them for fun.
I don't think eating them makes much difference, unless you actually NEED the food.
Let me try again.
Hunting, as we do it where I live, is a competition between the animal and the hunter--finding it, getting the shot, hauling it back to the truck, butchering it and eating it.
Try to understand, I realize you don't care, but deer breed like rabbits, there are lots of them. If we don't cull them they damage their environment, they damage it for every animal that depends on that environment and then they starve.
It matters to me, because I care about suffering, that these animals not suffer.
Additionally I have no special affection for humans nor do I value them above all other life forms. As a matter of fact I'd rather the numbers of humans be culled back significantly to provide room for non-humans.
It may seem a paradox to you, but I can both care about them and enjoy hunting and eating them.
That's life, it's how god designed things to be.
This psychological paradox is not unique to me. Many people who lived a sustenance existence--American Indians for instance--expressed this same paradoxical relationship to the realities of their lives and the necessities of procuring food.