Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site harvard.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!hao!seismo!harvard!marie
From: marie@harvard.ARPA (Marie Desjardins)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: Re: Flame Broiled Veal
Message-ID: <187@harvard.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 7-Dec-84 15:26:48 EST
Article-I.D.: harvard.187
Posted: Fri Dec  7 15:26:48 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 10-Dec-84 02:19:52 EST
References: <139@gcc-opus.ARPA> <878@ihuxx.UUCP>, <168@harvard.ARPA> <880@ihuxx.UUCP> <161@talcott.UUCP>
Organization: Aiken Computation Laboratory, Harvard
Lines: 28

> 
> Why don't you leave these men alone?  You don't know that they did anything
> but hunt deer.  And since deer are not endangered species, they haven't
> hurt you, your relatives, or your friends.  In fact, they haven't hurt
> anyone.  

Except the deer.  (This statement isn't meant to start an argument,
rather to remind everyone that every argument has an opposing side.
E.g. the deer, who would probably prefer to live, given a chance.)

> I don't consider hunting deer to be very pleasant, or even
> worthwhile, but that doesn't mean that there should be such name-calling.
> 
> What men do in their spare time is *their* business.

But not women.  ( only about .01 :-) )  Yeah, that's what I say too.
You know?  Like, if a man wants to go out and rape a woman in his spare
time, that's HIS business.

I think this argument bears a lot of similarity to the smoking in public
argument.  It seems that at least a number of people (myself included)
are opposed to neither cigarette smoking nor deer hunting.  But a large
number of those people are opposed to cigarette smoking in public places
(which offends their senses) and public displays of dead animals (which
offends their sensibilities).

	Marie desJardins
	marie@harvard