Jump to content

Do you really kill mountain lions in US Canada


Recommended Posts

It's savage. Nature on this planet is WRONG. The way this world works is WRONG, and the sooner we develop out of this mess, the better.

 

I can only stomach so much self-loathing. This "man-is-unnatural" argument is lazy and self-fulfilling. With this thinking, no amount of good works or ethical treatment is EVER going to be enough.

 

Frankly, I think arguments like this are horrible. If you think something is wrong, fix it. Why walk around hating yourself based on criteria you've purposely placed out of your own reach?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed :(

 

 

I somehow doubt that. I certainly feel no need to kill animals.

 

 

It's savage. Nature on this planet is WRONG. The way this world works is WRONG, and the sooner we develop out of this mess, the better.

Are you a vegan? Edited by ACG52
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I somehow doubt that. I certainly feel no need to kill animals.

 

I get the urge to kill annoying bugs, but not fellow chordates. Noting the (partly or entirely) insectivorous diets of other primates, I bet we started small and worked our way up.

Probably no big game prior to the invention of fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can only stomach so much self-loathing.

I don't hate myself (no, not even a little bit). How did I even imply that?

 

This "man-is-unnatural" argument is lazy and self-fulfilling.

 

I never made that argument :rolleyes: If anything, humans should develop beyond nature. Nature isn't something I'm particularly fond of because it's savage and nasty. We can do better than that.

 

Are you a vegan?

 

Sadly not, but I don't think I'd have a problem with becoming one.

Edited by Thorham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Squeamishness is not a moral virtue.

I'm squeamish because I think nature is savage and nasty? Oh lord :rolleyes: Nature IS savage and nasty. Go survive in it for a while and you'll find that out rather quickly. Perhaps it's the luxuries of technology that have blinded you to this fact.

 

So you let someone else kill the food you eat and castigate them for it. That's pretty hypocritical.

I don't eat meat :rolleyes:

Edited by Thorham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's savage. Nature on this planet is WRONG. The way this world works is WRONG, and the sooner we develop out of this mess, the better.

 

I don't want to go off-topic here too much, but I wanted to point out this example of what I meant earlier.

 

You've declared what we're doing (or what nature is doing) is WRONG. You've declared further that our methodology, "the way this world works", is also WRONG. You claim we need to "develop out of this mess" as quickly as possible.

 

You don't say what is RIGHT, which leads us to assume it must be the opposite of what we're doing now. This means changing just about everything about us, the way we live, where we live, what we eat. And you give us no boundaries or goals to reach, just this nebulous, impractical, development out of a false dilemma. Using your argument, we have no way to satisfy what YOU think is RIGHT.

 

I've seen this all my life. You're a well-meaning person with a dream for mankind, but you've either over-defined what needs to happen to the point where it will never happen, or you haven't defined RIGHT at all, so you can just keep shifting the goalposts no matter how much good mankind can achieve.

 

The mountain lions need a better plan from you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's because I don't know. I only know there's something wrong with the way things work now.

 

OK. I get that. Just be careful that your focus may be too broad. Problems seem insurmountable until we break them down to doable steps, with clear resolutions.

 

Specific actions are what will help most here, like banning the hunting of female mountain lions. Does it solve the problem outright? No, but it's a nudge in the right direction. Enough nudges gets the job done, and may even help us deal with the changes more efficiently. But if you insist that all hunting must cease to make things right in your book, then you're doomed to fail, back to facing that insurmountable problem with no solution.

 

I hate to see you do that to yourself, is all. Nudge something tomorrow, see how it feels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

That's because I don't know. I only know there's something wrong with the way things work now.
There's also something wrong with your perceptions - nature is in a category level of entity to which words like "nasty" cannot apply. You are not bigger than nature. Nature is bigger than you are. There is no vantage point from which you can make such judgments.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps it's the luxuries of technology that have blinded you to this fact.

 

 

Seeing how you've brought this up, let me ask you a question.

 

Do you wash your hands often? I'm not talking about the obvious times, like after using the facilities or working with dirty things. More like before meals, after a nap or just because it feels good.

 

Hand washing kills millions of bugs. Most of them are harmless, many are beneficial.

 

Chances are if you didn't wash your hands in many instances, it's unlikely you'll die or even get sick.

 

If you've answered yes to any part of this question, how can you be so cruel to needlessly massacre so many helpless creatures, whilst brashly judging others as psychopaths for killing one?

 

 

Perhaps it's the luxuries of technology that have blinded you to this fact.

 

 

 

The guilty dog always barks first. Just saying...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if you insist that all hunting must cease to make things right in your book, then you're doomed to fail, back to facing that insurmountable problem with no solution.

 

Ultimately it must, yes. One day we're going to have to leave nature behind and move on.

 

There's also something wrong with your perceptions - nature is in a category level of entity to which words like "nasty" cannot apply.

That's just your opinion and I don't agree.

 

You are not bigger than nature. Nature is bigger than you are.

For now nature is bigger than us, yes. One day we will know enough to leave it behind, and then we will be beyond nature. A day that almost can't come too soon.

 

There is no vantage point from which you can make such judgments.

I can make any judgement about anything

 

Seeing how you've brought this up, let me ask you a question.

 

Do you wash your hands often? I'm not talking about the obvious times, like after using the facilities or working with dirty things. More like before meals, after a nap or just because it feels good.

 

Hand washing kills millions of bugs. Most of them are harmless, many are beneficial.

 

Chances are if you didn't wash your hands in many instances, it's unlikely you'll die or even get sick.

 

If you've answered yes to any part of this question, how can you be so cruel to needlessly massacre so many helpless creatures, whilst brashly judging others as psychopaths for killing one?

 

 

Perhaps it's the luxuries of technology that have blinded you to this fact.

 

 

 

The guilty dog always barks first. Just saying...

 

Wow, you're equating animal suffering and death to killing bacteria. How bright!

Edited by Thorham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You didn't answer my question. You've dismissed it.

 

I will ask again, needlessly killing living things you can't see is acceptable then?

 

I'm NOT going to answer this nonsense seriously :P

You can't do it from an unattainable vantage point.

 

Like I said, I can judge whatever I want. Vantage point is irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm NOT going to answer this nonsense seriously :P

 

There's nothing nonsensical about it.

 

There is no difference between creatures great or small.

 

Very telling how most animal rights activists seem to only pick the cute or furry creatures as tokens for their righteous indignation.

 

They're often the one's least affected by them or who's obsessive compulsive nature prevents them from objectively addressing all of the fact issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There's nothing nonsensical about it.

 

There is no difference between creatures great or small.

 

Very telling how most animal rights activists seem to only pick the cute or furry creatures as tokens for their righteous indignation.

 

They're often the one's least affected by them or who's obsessive compulsive nature prevents them from objectively addressing all of the fact issues.

I rescue worms stranded on the pavement. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There's nothing nonsensical about it.

 

There is no difference between creatures great or small.

 

Very telling how most animal rights activists seem to only pick the cute or furry creatures as tokens for their righteous indignation.

 

They're often the one's least affected by them or who's obsessive compulsive nature prevents them from objectively addressing all of the fact issues.

 

Male bovine excrement and you know it.

Edited by Thorham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't eat meat :rolleyes:

 

I can use those those same absurdities to bolster my point too. Like:

 

Why are all those vegetarians causing all the bees to be killed? They'd have them penned like chickens to be infested in mites, simply because they think honey is superior sugar.

 

Agricultural runoff is known to be one of the world's greatest pollution sources. It displaces wild animals from their habitat. Tilling, fertilizers and pesticides destroy entire ecosystems, plant or animal.

 

Why are they destroying all those cute gophers so they can stuff themselves with soybeans or cereal grains? Surely they can do without tofu or granola bars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I can use those those same absurdities to bolster my point too. Like:

 

Why are all those vegetarians causing all the bees to be killed? They'd have them penned like chickens to be infested in mites, simply because they think honey is superior sugar.

 

Agricultural runoff is known to be one of the world's greatest pollution sources. It displaces wild animals from their habitat. Tilling, fertilizers and pesticides destroy entire ecosystems, plant or animal.

 

Why are they destroying all those cute gophers so they can stuff themselves with soybeans or cereal grains? Surely they can do without tofu or granola bars.

 

All I'm saying is that I find it psycho to enjoy killing, that killing animals isn't very nice, nature is savage and nasty, and that humans need to develop beyond nature somehow. What's wrong with that?

Edited by Thorham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

All I'm saying is that I find it psycho to enjoy killing, that killing animals isn't very nice, nature is savage and nasty, and that humans need to develop beyond nature somehow. What's wrong with that?

You shouldn't anthropomorphise nature. Nature is just the way things are, it is not an entity. i agree with your basic premise that killing for pleasure is something that not compatible with notions of the higher ideals of humanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.