RE: Divided we fall
I agree with EVERYTHING you just posted, 100%.
My point was, I hear people use the "we have to stick together" argument, when it simply isn't always true. There are issues in "hunting" that I, and some others, completely 100% disagree with and feel they are BAD for hunting and will do nothing to grow and protect hunting. On these issues, such as canned hunting as an example, I feel hunters backing them just for the sake of "sticking together" do nothing but hurt hunting as a hole.
However, your point about debate of much of what gets debated is valid. There is a line there where one should not cross just for the sake of sticking together.
the problem often becomes the definition of the label. By this I mean labels such as "fenced hunting", "trophy hunting", "canned hunting". these can be defined, and often are, so that they are legit hunting, however they also can be defined to be reprehensible and things that if we defend do nothing but hurt hunting as a whole. That is why whenever I get into a debate about topics such as those, first thing I ask is "define xxxx", then I frame my argument from that.
Blind obedience for the sake of uniform support, is wrong.
--Bob