I agree with you how sad that people could do that and it don't even bother them.Difference between game hunting and murder?
A deer is a animal and animals are permitted by God in scripture as food for us. God is the determiner of right and wrong. He has permitted man to slaughter animals for nourishment. Therefore it is not wrong.
To slaughter men is not permitted.
I do alot of hunting (I generally eat what I kill with the exception of some inedible or undesirable game....such as some wild hogs, or rodent like creatures). I have never shot a human being (and hopefully will never have to) but I do clearly see a massive moral difference between the two...and seriously do not understand anyone who would claim there is none (to say such a thing is clearly not a argument that is ever going to be effective with reasonable people).
A human being was created in the image of God. Also, we have much greater cognitive abilities and animals are a means of provision for us. Does this mean that we should cause other creatures to go extinct, no.
I live near Philadelphia and I occasionally drive through Valley Forge park. The deer in the park were protected from hunters and there are no natural predators within the park. The conclusion, the deer have overridden the area. The tick population has shot through the roof, making the county the most tick infested in the nation. Deer getting hit by cars increases more and more as the population grows. Both humans and deer lives are at risk in such situations. They now are allowing hunters to come in and better control the population, plus, the deer meat is not contaminated with chemicals that American beef is (ah, those poor cows). It's fluffy headed thinking like yours that cause more problems in the long run. I'm glad the rest of the nation doesn't buy into your ideology, no offense.
I'm not in favour of hunting for sport. But I do differentiate between people and animals. Just as I differentiate between family and strangers.
Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of another person - in law, in english and in religion. Under no definition does killing an animal count as murder (apart from yours I guess). But I guess that still does not make it right - it's just not int he same league
Hunting is not just for fun, although it can be enjoyable
the government has quotas on how many of a certain animal can be killed in a certain area at a certain time of year (duck season, deer season, etc.) this is to keep overpopulation down in order to assure adequate resources for the remaining animals.
It is kind of demented. You drink with your friends, you find Bambi, and you assert your dominance and skill by blowing Bambi's brains out with a semi-auto rifle that could have stopped a moose.
We've also shot all the predators in many places. Without population control deer will overpopulate and die from starvation, disease and trying to cross roads for greener pastures. A certain number of deer will die unless we devise a way to put Bambi on the pill, and by allowing people to shoot them they are better off.
You said it:
* Killing a deer, or duck, or any other wild animal, vs
* Killing a member of your own species, a person, a man or woman.
For many there is a great difference between killing a human being than killing another animal or killing a plant.
Ok, so what's the difference between a camel and an apple?
Give up?
Well, if you don't know the difference, then remind me not to send YOU to the store if I ever need any apples.
If you don't know the difference between hunting animals and murder, you have a serious problem!
Deer meat is great, Bambi tastes good, you cant buy that in most supermarkets, and man has killed off most of the deer's natural predators. If hunting wasn't allowed the deer would over populate, run out of resources and slowly starve to death. So, which one is more humane?
there is no difference between killing an innocent human or a ';guilty'; human. humans have souls
God put animals on earth for us to wear and it, same with plants, and water. they do not have souls. shooting animals for fun is wrong.
For families to eat if necessary yes, but it would be ';Pride'; with the 'sport shooting' and ';Self-centered Ego'; when they shove them up on a wall or a 'trophy'! (To kill a human out of pre-meditation, that is Murder! Period!)
Well Honey, im what you might call a ';backwoods'; boy from Iowa, and most of us eat what we kill, especially when times are tough for us poor fellas.
Murder is the unlawful taking of human life.
Shooting a deer is not murder because a deer is not a human.
Deer are tasty. I don't know about humans, but I suspect this is another difference.
I eat what I kill. Not only that, if there is too much, I donate to a local charity to feed the homeless. Get a grip. There is no valid comparison of providing food for yourself or others and murdering humans.
Uh ... you just gave the difference. In one case the victim is a mere animal, in the other case a child of God created in His own image and likeness.
My brother is a hunter. He eats what he kills. Is it murder? No of course not. Killing for sport on the other hand is murder in my opinion.
I get the feeling that the mounted human heads i have on my wall is not normal?
maybe i shouldnt have mentioned that.
Please tell me your kidding about not seeing a difference between killing a deer and killing a human.
Whats the difference if you go a pick some fruit and bring it home. It has been killed since you took it from the tree that was sustaining its life.
You have successfully been reprogrammed by the liberal propoganda machine. 1 point for communism.
You can't murder an animal.
Murder applies ONLY to humans.
dear=animal
human=human
im not in favor of hunting for fun but still there is a difference.
killing animals for amusement shows that u have a tiny dick and need to compensate that by shooting harmless animals with a high-tech riffle. u need neither skill nor bravery for that.
however, a human being is worth more than an animal, however innocent it might be.
None. No difference. Unless you're starving, then it had better be a fair fight. This means no guns or arrows either.
deer is an animal and we eat it.
Humans are way more important then animals.
You are just another teenage girl who think that animals are equal to humans. I would rather have thousands of animals die then let one human.
The victim of one has rights and a social security number.
people who hunt for game dont just leave animals out in the paddock 90 percent is eaten
Why is this question in this section?
But seriously, not much.
I don't encourage needless killing, but there is a vast difference between going out and shooting an innocent deer and shooting an innocent human being. First of all, if you shoot an innocent human being...I'll be shooting you next. Secondly, a deer isn't human and there is a line whereby we must draw which defines us as predators. We hunt for food and since now our food sources can be hunt free, some people feel the need to relive their ancient past and get in touch with it by hunting animals. While you may dislike it, the death of a deer will cause a lost of conscience unequal to the death of an innocent human (simply meaning, innocent human %26gt; deer).
Now think about it, in the wild animals kill each other all the time and despite what you think you know not all of them hunt 'just enough' to survive. Many times, the amount of animals killed is in excess simply because it's an instinct. Before you reprimand us, you should reprimand them. Compared to them, humans are far better living beings.
Here's a solution, instead of hunting deers then. Hunt tigers, lions coyotes and especially dogs/wolves. Use a bazooka if you want a kick out of it, they have been murdering their own kind so it's time we killed them off. Save the herbivores I'd say, on a side note there is financial benefits to hunting so it's not hunting for the game.
I can see where your stand is as well as attempt to share the same views as you but I think you are deluded to compare humans and animals, even if we are all living things we are superior not because we can kill them. But because we have consciences, we know what is right what is wrong. If a tiger saw your mom, who is a sweet innocent woman (assumingly) and felt hunger. Do you think it would find a crimminal to attack instead of her? No, because it cannot understand law or good. It has NO GOOD in it's heart, therefore it's death is nothing to mourn about because it sure as heck wouldn't mourn for you.
While we humans, we can distinguish good and otherwise. If we were hungry and had a gun, we would fire it at the tiger than the rabbit who had done nothing wrong to us so far. To save someone innocent and deserving to live, there are some of us who would even risk our lives to save them. But to an animal, NEVER will they do that.
Ignorance is just an excuse, it is never a reason for sin. You can say it's because animals don't know and therefore continue to harm, but the harm is still done whether they know it or not. The result is all that matters, if someone killed another person innocent then they deserve to be killed. Animals will take all that it is to survive, they have no morals. If they can kill their own kind so ficklely, I don't see why we can't kill them as willfully as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment