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