Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site mhuxt.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!edsel!bentley!hoxna!houxm!mhuxj!mhuxt!js2j From: js2j@mhuxt.UUCP (sonntag) Newsgroups: net.flame Subject: Re: Flame Broiled Veal Message-ID: <384@mhuxt.UUCP> Date: Fri, 30-Nov-84 11:55:36 EST Article-I.D.: mhuxt.384 Posted: Fri Nov 30 11:55:36 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 1-Dec-84 20:18:46 EST References: <139@gcc-opus.ARPA> <878@ihuxx.UUCP> <168@harvard.ARPA> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill Lines: 57 > Parkway through New Jersey and New York, I saw a group of 3 cars coming > back from a hunting trip. Now I eat meat, and it doesn't offend me to > think of people hunting for food, but these men were obviously not > starving to death, so I assume they were hunting for sport. Between In other words, nobody who isn't starving could possibly be hunting for food. (Did you know that a mature deer will yield ~35-45 lbs of venison? Worth at least 75 to 80 dollars in terms of meat these men won't have to buy from the grocery store.) > them they had a total of 6 bucks and 2 bears tied onto their cars. With > dead, open eyes staring at me. I have not been as offended as I was Maybe they should have closed the eyes? > then in a long time. First of all, I was disgusted with these men, > looking so smug and proud of themselves for killing eight wild animals. You were able to tell how proud and smug they were just by driving by? You must be an extremely perceptive individual. (and why shouldn't they be proud? Only about one hunter in 10 manages to get a buck at all, and far fewer than that are successful in bear season.) > Very macho. I was not impressed. Second of all, why should I have to I'm sure that they're very disappointed that they didn't manage to impress you. That was probably their entire goal. > look at these dead animals, tied onto the trunk of someone's car? At > the very least they could have covered them. But WHY DID THEY KILL THEM But these men had never heard of you, let alone heard of the fact that you were offended by the sight of unprocessed food. How could you expect them to know that they would meet you that day? > IN THE FIRST PLACE? Maybe for food? No, I guess you've already proved that non-starving people have no use for food. > a hypocrite (but you eat meat!). I eat beef, I eat chicken, I eat pork > on occasion. Those animals were raised for food. Deer were not raised > for food. I don't have any ultra-moral mentality, but I can't see any > reason for killing these animals (argument #2: there are too many deer. > That's because we go around killing their natural predators. Is this > right either?) Did you know that animals which are raised for food are no less alive, no less able to feel pain, etc. as wild animals? Why is it that you feel that it is alright to eat domesticated animals and not wild ones? As far as us going around killing their natural predators, sorry you're wrong. We don't. Our ancestors did, however. (the predators had a nasty habit of killing domesticated animals instead of wild ones.) Since the predators are gone, I guess that you are advocating letting all of those deer die of disease and starvation. Grizzly Adams would be proud of you. Jeff Sonntag