Killing animals for sport

Post Reply New Topic

Actually i don't mind animal experimentation, if animal expermintation didn't happen i bet a lot of the really useful drugs that are in circulation wouldn't have been approved yet because they would be stuck trying to prove what happens when people use it. So in that sense I think animal experimentation should conitnue but only for medical drugs.

Human beings aren't carnivores and don't actually "have" to eat meat, whereas some animals are and have no other way with which to rely on a food supply. I think most people know about something called endorphins which take over in situations for example where one is being killed. In this respect, nature has again been merciful. Human beings on the other hand create more suffering than all animal species and populations put together, by way of their brute ignorance and insensitivity.

That's really sad...

I too am absolutely disgusted by killing animals for sport and it only makes me more disgusted to hear those idiots brag about it. Killing should never be fun or a hobby, that's just sick. I can understand that people need to eat and that it's sometimes necessary to kill animals for food, but to do it for sport or just so you can have an animal fur or a stuffed animal for fun or to brag about... no way, that's just pure wrong in my opinion.

Animal hunting is one of the most ridiculous f****n' things conceived

Eating them after isn't much better.

QFT.

ps:
Human beings are not carnivores, that is true. However, we are omnivores (very similar to pigs and rats in terms of natural diet).

That's a matter of distinction.

?
not sure what you mean.

Look it up. I'm not here to educate people.

Wrong. Every deer I've shot and every fish I've kept were taken as humanely as possible for the purpose of food. I respect the animals I take.

In fact, I respect them enough that I stopped deer hunting a few years ago because I started to feel like I didn't enjoy the experience enough to justify killing the deer, even if it was for food.

I know what distinction means. I'm not sure what you mean by it in this context. I think you might actually be mis-using the word.

from wikipedia:
Distinction, the fundamental philosophical abstraction, involves the recognition of two or more things being distinct, i.e. different.
Distinction (social) is a social force that places different values on different individuals. (social, class, and style)
Distinction (law) is a principle under international humanitarian law governing the legal use of force in an armed conflict.

None of those make a great deal of sense in this context - at least, not if you were trying to make some sort of point as opposed to simply stating an observation of what I had written.

Look up omnivore, maybe it will become clear.

I'm a biologist. I know what an omnivore is.

I get the feeling that you're cornered and you're just trying to pretend that you have some sort of valid point.

I think you maybe ought to look it up.

...or get a little more depth to your education.

carnivore: an animal that eats predominantly animals.
omnivore: an animal that eats both animals and plants.
herbivore: an animal that eats predominantly plants.

Ok, so you don't have a point. Good to know.