is killing animals alright?{vegetarianism/buddhism etc}

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
It's not an arguement, its a statement. Just like if someone is anti-drugs, it doesn't give them the authority to go around telling people to stop.

Yes; it's fun and perfectly legal.

You honestly think I'm going to stop because some kid half my age (who has a soft spot for cute woodland creatures) is telling me to?

There aren't 15 school shootings a week, I guarantee you.

Well, you can damage your own body as much as you want, yes it's legal; I'm arguing that it's disgusting that you don't have a moral objection to it.

I don't see why age should matter. Don't really have a soft spot for them and I'm not telling you to do anything, I'm asking you questions abut it and voicing my own opinion, and you're getting upset.

I'm perfectly aware that there aren't 15 school shootings per week, there are however a number per year, far more than any other country. Why do you think there is more in the U.S?

Originally posted by Bardock42
It's not an unfair advantage, since the animals aren't participants, they are the subjects/tools of the sport.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
now you are talking of animals killing animals. We are talking of humans killing animals.

It's a COMPARISON. Wouldn't have made sense if I had made a comparison involving a human and another animal.

I don't think I need to explain why that would have been redundant. At least I hope not.

anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

Originally posted by InnerRise
No I'm not. I gave you a comparison to the fact that you pointed out that HUMANS have an UNFAIR ADVANTAGE over other animals.

It's a COMPARISON. Wouldn't have made sense if I had made a comparison involving a human and another animal.

I don't think I need to explain why that would have been redundant. At least I hope not.

anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

some idiot who cant even spell his own name going after an animal with a rifle is another.

apples and oranges.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
well, hell, now that you explained it like that, I have to totally rethink it. 😛

Personally I don't see the appeal of hunting, but I guess I can understand why some people might.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Cool. 😊

Personally I don't see the appeal of hunting, but I guess I can understand why some people might.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
an animal going against another animal, tooth and claw, WITHOUT modern weapons is one thing.

some idiot who cant even spell his own name going after an animal with a rifle is another.

apples and oranges.

anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

Originally posted by InnerRise
You just don't grasp the concept of "USING COMPARISONS TO MAKE A POINT."

anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I see why too, but I dont see how it can be a sport.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I get the concept, but yours has no bearing here.

Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, go to dictionary.com and look up sport, that kinda puts and end to this.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Well I already know that you're gun-phobic, so I would expect something like that out of you.

Or just answer my question.

You argued that bears etc aren't helpless because they have claws and such, natural means of defending themselves. A gun is not, which is what you hunt with.

So your argument is bs and so are you for chickening out of it.

Originally posted by InnerRise
Does not the Ferocious Lion have an unfair advantage over the timid Gazelle?

No, it's not walking around with a weapon it made, just like the gazelle isn't riding around on a motorcycle, escaping lions.

Your comparison is dumb. Great White Sharks have better...everything than more or less any fish in the sea, or any mammal in the sea for that matter, naturally though. It didn't go to a Walmart and buy .45 calibre teeth to hunt a dolphin.

-AC

Originally posted by InnerRise
It indeed does.

Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

This should be fun.

Rogue Jedi and InnerRise asking each other questions. By the time either of them answer animals will have evolved to actually use rifles, and both arguments will be redundant.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Or just answer my question.

You argued that bears etc aren't helpless because they have claws and such, natural means of defending themselves. A gun is not, which is what you hunt with.

So your argument is bs and so are you for chickening out of it.

It's not bull, humans lack any natural weapon (except the brain) so we need to compensate. And the gun is the result of human brainpower.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No, it's not walking around with a weapon it made, just like the gazelle isn't riding around on a motorcycle, escaping lions.

Your comparison is dumb. Great White Sharks have better...everything than more or less any fish in the sea, or any mammal in the sea for that matter, naturally though. It didn't go to a Walmart and buy .45 calibre teeth to hunt a dolphin.

-AC

That wasn't my quote.

I just caught the gazelle on the motorbike thing. 😂

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
It's not bull, humans lack any natural weapon (except the brain) so we need to compensate. And the gun is the result of human brainpower.

It's not, is it? You said bears aren't helpless because they have NATURAL means of defending themselves, right? Against what? Other natural means, exactly.

If they evolved with bulletproof skin, you'd have an argument. It's natural defense against unnatural means of attack, so the bear having claws and teeth doesn't remove from it being helpless when facing off against a shotgun or a rifle.

-AC

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
explain how it does? you are talking about one animal killing another for the sole sake of survival. what does that have to do with man hunting animals with a rifle?

So in my comparison/example......the Lion represented the human, which has the unfair advantage over the animal, the Gazelle.

It showed that this "unfair advantage" that you spoke of, is apart of the much bigger picture.

I don't see you complaining about other species that have advantages over others.......b/c it's a natural part of life and this applies to humans as well so you shouldn't be complaining.

It's nothing wrong with Humans having this "unfair advantage." One species will always have an unfair advantage over another. It's the Circle of Life and it provides balance and structure.

You see it as being "unfair" and wrong when it's simply not.

Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
If someone needs a dictionary to define what sport is, they are beyond help.

Originally posted by InnerRise
Ok. So you said Humans have an unfair advantage over animals.

So in my comparison/example......the Lion represented the human, which has the unfair advantage over the animal, the Gazelle.

It showed that this "unfair advantage" that you spoke of, is apart of the much bigger picture.

I don't see you complaining about other species that have advantages over others.......b/c it's a natural part of life and this applies to humans as well so you shouldn't be complaining.

It's nothing wrong with Humans having this "unfair advantage." One species will always have an unfair advantage over another. It's the Circle of Life and it provides balance and structure.

You see it as being "unfair" and wrong when it's simply not.

Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

Totally flawed, as I have factually proven here:

"No, it's not walking around with a weapon it made, just like the gazelle isn't riding around on a motorcycle, escaping lions.

Your comparison is dumb. Great White Sharks have better...everything than more or less any fish in the sea, or any mammal in the sea for that matter, naturally though. It didn't go to a Walmart and buy .45 calibre teeth to hunt a dolphin.".

Humans with guns have an unfair advantage, lions hunting gazelles do not. Fact. We're talking about how Quiero said a bear isn't helpless and cited natural means of defense as a reason why...against firearms. It's a simple concept, one side has an unfair advantage.

-AC