Not really. As I mentioned there is a massive difference between laws that can be reasonably enforced and laws that are a logistical nightmare. Also that apparently American hunters are the assholes they've been made out to be. What are you guys even doing with guns if you can't even respect the animal enough to take a solid shot? It'll happen that you miss accidentally, sure, but that again is different from deliberately doing something in a particular way.
Witchcraft is older than Christianity. Certainly an animal being tortured to death so a person can converse with the spirit god of suffering is a firmly held religious belief. It ought to be protected by your own logic. So that isn't really outflanking so much as total capitulation.
Animal Rights vs. Religious Rights
Re: Animal Rights vs. Religious Rights
by eynon81 » Mon Feb 17, 2014 1:15 pm
I'm still wrestling with your statements regarding how hard it is to regulate hunting, one of the most regulated pass-times in the US.
-
eynon81 - VIP
- Posts: 19475
- Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 10:38 am
- Location: Golden, Colorado
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 3875 times
- Been thanked: 1821 times
- Political Leaning: Very Conservative
Re: Animal Rights vs. Religious Rights
by exploited » Mon Feb 17, 2014 1:16 pm
Depends on the poaching law really. Endangered species? Kind of a big deal and worth the enforcement efforts. But generally speaking most poaching laws are pretty worthless and are better dealt with by pricing people out of the market (make doing it expensive by providing lawful alternatives) and discouraging it with existing laws... Like trespassing laws that actually get enforced (a big problem for farmers).
The point is, religious tradition really doesn't provide that great of an argument, because in order to apply it fairly, you are going to either have to accept all of it, or just decide that only religions that are old get a pass. Either way is brutally inconsistent. Not to mention discriminatory as hell.
The point is, religious tradition really doesn't provide that great of an argument, because in order to apply it fairly, you are going to either have to accept all of it, or just decide that only religions that are old get a pass. Either way is brutally inconsistent. Not to mention discriminatory as hell.
-
exploited - Vice President
- Posts: 23035
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:32 pm
- Location: Ontario, Canada
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 2562 times
- Been thanked: 1837 times
Re: Animal Rights vs. Religious Rights
by exploited » Mon Feb 17, 2014 1:28 pm
I don't think religion is dumb. You're not turning into a War on Religion nutjob are you? I can detect undercurrents of serious feels in your post. Not good.
Wiccanism isn't young. It is ancient. And your position relies far more on value judgments then mine. Which is why you are trying to make purposefully painful slaughter into the same thing as accidentally missing a shot.
Wiccanism isn't young. It is ancient. And your position relies far more on value judgments then mine. Which is why you are trying to make purposefully painful slaughter into the same thing as accidentally missing a shot.
Last edited by exploited on Mon Feb 17, 2014 1:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
exploited - Vice President
- Posts: 23035
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:32 pm
- Location: Ontario, Canada
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 2562 times
- Been thanked: 1837 times
Re: Animal Rights vs. Religious Rights
by The Comrade » Mon Feb 17, 2014 1:29 pm
STOP CIRCLE JERKING YOU'RE DRIVING ME OFF THIS SITE1
- These users thanked the author The Comrade for the post:
- Bauce
-
The Comrade - Vice President
- Posts: 18439
- Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 1:10 pm
- Location: Yugoslavia
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 1212 times
- Been thanked: 1889 times
- Political Leaning: Socialist
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 152 guests