Home, Archive, Stuff, Random thoughts, London, My Rigs, Pictures, Dreams, Links, About, Contact, Search
 

spikegifted - Random thoughts

 

Never mind fox hunting.....

April 21, 2004

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The only reason fox hunting isn't banned is cos its enjoyed by the great and good.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Just to get it out of the way first: I'm not for or against fox hunting. I don't really care what they want to do with their spare time - it's up to them, they're not shooting at people. Whether there's pain and suffering done to the animals, I don't know and, to be completely honestly with you, we, as a society, are more cruel to our fellow humans than we're to some of our 'pets' so I think we're in no position to make a judgment!]

So are you suggesting that just because a 'majority' of people don't part take or don't even approve of fox hunting, there should be a law to ban it? What kind of a society do you think we live in? As far as I know, we live in a liberal democratic society where people can pretty much do what they like as long as they don't break the law. Now are you suggesting that we should create a law to stop people from doing something they enjoy just because you don't part take or even understand (nor want to)? What do you think this country is? Some kind of a Nazi police state?

By the looks of things, your attitude is consistent with the Bolshevik Communist in the Soviet Union - you're against something probably not because you genuinely care about any particular issues, but you're prefer to look at it as a 'class struggle'. Well, that's just pathetic!

Lots of people don't like ramblers because they 'trespass' on their land another 'important things' (like golf courses!). However, there's a law out there protecting the right to ramble in certain designated areas, through private land as well. Guess what, your attitude suggests that if you've a 'thing' against ramblers, you'd think it is entirely justifiable to change the law and remove that right...

Some dictators are considerate that you're.

---

April 21, 2004

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the foxes in the city is not because there numbers are so swollen they are migrating but rather that our cities are more and more infringing into their habitat.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This comment of yours simply devoid of all knowledge, logic and common sense, which is pretty much what I'd expect from a self-obsessed 'class hero'.

Foxes survive and thrive in cities not simply because humans have built into or eliminated their natural habitat. More accurately speaking, foxes and other animals have carried out a 'reverse takeover' of human habitats - simply because they're intelligent and adaptable. They found that humans actually throws out a large amount of eatable material as garbage and as our societies 'advance' or 'make progress' we become more wasteful, which in turn means more food for them.

---

October 20, 2004

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Just to get it out of the way first: I'm not for or against fox hunting. I don't really care what they want to do with their spare time - it's up to them, they're not shooting at people. Whether there's pain and suffering done to the animals, I don't know

A little thought on whatís it like to be chased to exhaustion and then ripped to pieces and Iím sure even the most hardened person will admit canít be a pleasant experience.
Furthermore, it is not only the foxes that suffer but the hounds, most suffer from deep cuts from barbed wire fences, attempting to run through bramble bushes, being hit by cars and that is not including the number that have died on rail lines. To add to this, if a hound doesn't make the grade and fails to become a decent hunting dog it is shot as are those who are no longer deemed adequate hunters.

and, to be completely honestly with you, we, as a society, are more cruel to our fellow humans than we're to some of our 'pets' so I think we're in no position to make a judgment!]

So because we are cruel to humans it is alright to also be cruel to animals? Surely the aim of any great and just society would be the removal of all forms of cruelty.
from the great man himself Ghandi "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."
Mohandas Gandhi

So are you suggesting that just because a 'majority' of people don't part take or don't even approve of fox hunting, there should be a law to ban it? What kind of a society do you think we live in? As far as I know, we live in a liberal democratic society where people can pretty much do what they like as long as they don't break the law.

And how are laws made? Laws are not static, they change in time. Badger baiting, cock fighting to name just two are recently made laws. It wasnít until something like 1991 that rape within marriage was criminalized. So by your argument are you saying rape was Right up until this point?

Now are you suggesting that we should create a law to stop people from doing something they enjoy just because you don't part take or even understand (nor want to)? What do you think this country is? Some kind of a Nazi police state?

People arenít saying Fox Hunting should be banned because people enjoy it, they are saying it should be banned because it is cruel and unnecessary. It has nothing to do with living in a police state.

By the looks of things, your attitude is consistent with the Bolshevik Communist in the Soviet Union - you're against something probably not because you genuinely care about any particular issues, but you're prefer to look at it as a 'class struggle'. Well, that's just pathetic! ... Some dictators are considerate that you're.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is so inconsequential that I've forgotten that I've posted to this pointless thread...

Anyway, first of all, I hate people who reply sentence by sentence. By doing so, you're just picking at others' arguments rather than allowing other people to present their views in a coherent manner. If you choose to do it to others, I don't really care, but please try not to do such horrible thing to my post. I think everyone deserves a little bit of respect.

Secondly, I don't care what you write in your other posts in reply, but all you've done in ripping my post apart was to play the devil's advocate - putting up a quote by Gandhi doesn't make your answer any more sensible.

Now, I very much doubt I'm a communist and it is rather refreshing being compared as a 'Bolshevik Communist in the Soviet Union'. You're claiming that I'm 'against something probably not because you genuinely care about any particular issues', yet my very first sentence in my post was: 'I'm not for or against fox hunting. I don't really care what they want to do with their spare time'. Did you read that? Or did you just launch into your pointless rambling just to bug me?

You're claiming that I 'prefer to look at it as a 'class struggle'. Well, I'm interested in finding out, from you, which bit of my post suggested that I look at fox hunting as a 'class struggle'? I think my post tried to point out that we live in a liberal democratic society. One which people has the freedom of choice - one which allows them to pursue their form of 'enjoyment'. You can take it whichever way you want to take it. I don't suggest we should or should not ban fox hunting? I'm actually questioning whether a law is actually necessary.

You're argument suggests that we should have laws against all things that are cruel. Well, life is cruel. Commuting to work in the London Underground is cruel. Stuck in a traffic jam day after day is cruel. Waiting for hours in the airport is cruel. Buying a house and being 'gazumped' is cruel. War is cruel. Paying taxes is cruel. Growing old is cruel. Reading the way you rip my post apart is cruel. Should we all stop doing all of that?

Look at how angry you're? You're accusing me for 'Well, that's just pathetic!'. Yet you're so angry that you can't even finish your accusation ('Some dictators are considerate that you're.' - just what is that suppose to be). Just because you don't have the same point of view as I do (or don't understand my point of view) doesn't make you right and I wrong.

Finally, I don't like the way you accuse me for being 'pathetic'. I might be pathetic, but that's not for you to judge. You don't know me. I'm just a guy who posted something that you happen to not like. I don't like the fact that you get personal on me. I hope I'm not asking for too much, but I think I can live without being called 'pathetic' by a stranger.


Link to Hexus.net Forum