HUNTERS BEWARE!!!

[Billc]

Re: HUNTERS BEWARE!!! Freedom of Speech

Kelvin, thanks for serving in the military. Yours is one of the noblist of callings!

Paul, you are absolutely right. I'm done with this thread. I think discussions about the Bill of Rights is meant for other boards. The only place on this board we get this kind of heated discussion is in "Oil & Lubricants", with synthetics vs fossiles, and Mark is the one usually getting blasted.

 

[Anonymous Poster]

Re: HUNTERS BEWARE!!! Freedom of Speech

Kelvin... I'd like to "2nd" Bob's thanks for your military service. I frequently ask to shake the hands of 'Nam vets (in particular) to show them some appreciation.. the treatment they received was a national disgrace!

You'll forgive me though, if I don't think that especially qualifies you to define the philosophy of "freedom/liberty" that is the basis for this country"s greatness ( you were "EVEN going to LET someone with different views go so far as to write them down?? ... and undoubtedly, be stretching your tolerance-limits to do so??!!). I MUCH prefer that such minds as Thomas Jefferson and his gang handle that job. I think they did it well, and we tinker with the result at our peril!

Imho, the defense of the ideals symbolized should always take precedence over our defense of ANY symbol.

If one is destroyed, we have a burnt piece of cloth... if the other is destroyed, we have a world with much, much, less to offer humankind.

(Is it a little ironic that "burning" is the officially-sanctioned method of disposing of flags unfit-for-display?)

Re. subject-matter:

What with Freud "positing" things, people burning flags, charges of "retentiveness" of one type or another, "dominion" being "given", and even a reference to abortion, we have trodden into all the "taboo" topics...sex, religion,politics,... and thrown in a good dash of psychology, to boot.

Simulating (maybe even a little stressful at times, for some) and interesting, for sure... so I'll throw in a few parting "stirs":

Re. a "broad educational background ": The broadest that a person can achieve in one lifetime( assuming such a limit) is very narrow, considering the actual "scope" of things. And keeping in mind the adage that " a little knowledge is a dangerous thing", it behooves all of us to remember that, compared to what-there-is-to-know..."a little knowledge" is all any of us have!

Lets remember that "positing" is JUST what Freud WAS doing.
His ideas were not "handed-down" "carved in stone".
He certainly was A bright guy...but he wasn't THE bright guy. And many other bright guys posit differently.

And speaking of "carving in stone": Do you think "GOD" gave Moses tablets of stone to carry an "eternal" set of rules for humankind because "HE" couldn't think far-enough ahead to carve in titanium, or space-age-ium, or whatever?...or didn't feel like writing it across the sky in stars, for all to see forever?
Or were they "carved in stone" because whoever made-up the story envisioned carving in stone to be the last word in permanent recording, thinking at the technology-level of his time?? (Pyramids crumble! I know that. You know that. "GOD" didn't know that?? Hummn!)

I suppose I'd better run-for-it, after THAT one!

...Back to one of those "tractor"-type threads, for some fresh air

Larry

 

[Kelvin]

Re: HUNTERS BEWARE!!! Freedom of Speech

Thanks for all the "military thanks". I especially want to thank those who appreciate the 'Nam vets (all my participation came after that war). But I must confess that I was bothered by the unusual interpretations of "free speech" even before I joined the military.

Maybe I'm a bit simplistic, but I like the dictionary definition of "speech":

"The faculty of speaking; language; talk; a formal discourse; oration".

Nowhere do I see "burning objects", "placing bombs in trees" (an attempt to get back to the original discussion) or even "writing" as covered in the definition of speech.

And I also agree that this post has stayed off course too long (occasional drifts don't bother me). Nonetheless, with very few exceptions (those are usually deleted by Muhammad), I am always impressed by the level of professionalism expressed on this board.

Kelvin

 

[patrickg]

Dear LHSMITH, Thank you so much for your words. Many of us hope fervently that they weren't wasted.

Patrick

 

[patrickg]

Gerard,
Send hunters to Oklahoma. We are innundated with deer and are extending seasons like
mad and begging people through ad campaigns to shoot antlerless deer and help ballance the herds. Of course some more enlightened souls among us might want to share some less violent means of achieving ballance.

Patrick

 

[patrickg]

RobertN,

The only time I accept a position against hunting is for a true vegetarian. (assuming from vice for)

OK all you folks, as Dark Helmet put it, "Stand by, we are going to jump to ludricous speed!"

I really appreciate what you had to say Bob. Thought I'd share some sentiments etc with you but this is an "OPEN LETTER" to all the vegetables, I mean vegetarians and would be fellow travelers.

Wrongheadedness remains such regardless of the diet of the proponent of a philosophy. I too would like to not hear anything about eating animals from anyone not a true complete vegetarian. It would cut down on wasted processing time.

Some sects wear flue masks (doctor/nursey thingies over their noses and mouths) to avoid breathing in living things and thereby killing them. Should that not be a requirement for "true" vegetarianism or is the size of the animal somehow a "special" factor. If size matters, then what is the minimum size animal that should be given "holy cow" type protection? If it is a philosophical/religious thing only but not of practical concern then as long as we feel deeply religious while killing and eating animals will that square it with the philosophical types, you think?

Aren't bugs (you know insects, arachnids, etc.) well established by science as animals? Were last time I heard. What about the folks who eat bugs? Is eating bugs immoral you think? They are animals, just not mammals, like chickens aren't mammals.

Sure hard to see a distinction between fish, fowl, and mammals regarding the appropriate philosophical position to take regarding killing and eating them. So since bugs are animals they are due the same consideration as whatever other animal life is eaten (or just killed for convenience).

Do vegetarians use bug zappers. What a cruel and tortuous thing to do. Worse yet they just kill for their own personal pleasure and then don't even eat what they kill. Then there are pesticides, fly swatters, pest strips, and bug repellents, how safe are bug repellents, really? Do they cause real damage to the bug in any way and how do you justify that damage. Was the bug a life threat. Oh yeah, would a vegetarian defend him/herself with potentially deadly (or maiming) force from an attack by an animal? It needn't be a griz or anaconda, how about a neighbors pit bull or a mosquito or a tick? I guess I need to see the guidelines on where to draw the line regarding animal species/size. Anyone got a ref to where I might read the "rules" on that?

How does a true vegetarian protect themselves (note gender neutral reference) from an attacking bit bull, try to choke the dog to death with your soft throat tissue followed by an attempt to drown it with blood from your jugular? I don't know a lot about their deeply held convictions (those oh so moral vegetarians) but am willing to learn.

I could go on (and on and on and on) but don't want to accept the awesome responsibility for causing any vegetarians to burn any midnight oil preparing to answer any of the above. Burning midnight oil which may have animal origins, howsoever far removed in time (do vegetarians drive and if so only in electric cars charged solely by solar cells?) Do they get leather seats? While driving do they do so slowly enough to avoid killing any birds or insects that might hit the windscreen? Is it the killing they don't like or just the eating part? If using public transporattion, how do they atone for any insects the bus driver dispaches? I have so much to learn about their specious sophistry and so little time to devote to it. Hopefully someone can give me the "Reader's Digest" version.

Again with appologies (and a wink) to Ian Sholes and the Duck's Breath Theater,

I gotta go,

Patrick P.S. Bob, I tried to keep it light man but it wasn't easy.

 

[richh]

G O GET-EM PAT GO PAT GO
Rich

 

[RPM]

My favorite hunting story is that claimed by a buddy of mine - who knows if he is telling the truth or passing along an urban legend.

Anyway, he tells me he was hunting in eastern PA when he came across a farmer he knew with a can of paint trying to paint something on the side of a brown cow. When he asked the farmer what he was trying to do, the farmer laughed and pointed at another cow half way across the field - there painted on its side was the word "cow".

Apparently this guy had a bit of a problem with guys from the city coming and hunting his property which backed up to state game lands. Not all of them knew exactly what a deer looked like before pulling the trigger.

Don't know if the story is true, but it gave me a laugh.

Patrick

 

[jimmoore]

Who drug this old thread up after almost a year?

jim

 

[scruffy]

patrickg.....who else?