HuntingNet.com Forums - View Single Post - Andy Rooney calls bow hunting "barbaric"

12-06-2002 | 03:12 PM

#28

Mwether

Joined: Feb 2003

Posts: 24

Likes: 0

From: Cheverly MD USA

RE: Andy Rooney calls bow hunting "barbaric"

ijimmy, thanks for your response. It contains a lot of interesting points. I'll try to respond to them one by one. Generally though my message is that labels are imprecise. Whether you call somebody a "liberal" or a "conservative," you're probably lumping them into a category that doesn't fit them perfectly. I find that I am liberal on some issues, and conservative on others. You might be too?
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quotequote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Mwether This board is called bowhunting and " most but not all " liberals are anti hunting .
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
I'm not convinced of this. In surveys I'm fairly sure that about 10-15% of Americans are pro-hunting, 10-15% are anti, and 70-80% are undecided. I think it might be a truer statement to say that of the people who oppose hunting, most also call themselves "liberal." Saying "'liberals' oppose hunting" is a shakier statement, I think. Seems to me a lot of people who would call themselves "liberals" on other issues are in that 70-80% on hunting, i.e., sitting on the fence.

It's our job to calmly and rationally explain the benefits of hunting to those folks. Surprisingly, the New York Times--one of the most "liberal" papers in the country--ran an editorial recently in support of culling does to reduce deer populations in the greater New York area. That sort of thing REALLY helps our cause. Maybe we and the NYT editorial staff can bring the undecideds around?!

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
In my mind this has to do with an adjenda thats mission is to make us rely on the goverment for our food and other necesites of life so that they can moniter our every move and either get a cut "taxs" or stop us from doing what we want and take away or freedoms .
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
I think you and I may have to differ here. I think foodstamps and welfare, etc.--what I imagine you are referring to--are for society's weakest and most at risk. I realize that we hear stories of welfare cheats and others who abuse the system, but I don't think that's a reason to get rid of something that helps many honest folks get back on their feet.

I don't think that there's an example of charity in history that some didn't try to take advantage of. One of the costs of handouts is that a few people will inevitably get greedy and try to take more than their fair share. It doesn't mean that the large majority don't play by the rules and thank God for the help!

I also don't think that there's a plan to get you and I--and others who can work and support their families--hooked on government assistance. I just don't see any evidence of that.

I guess that the real question here is whether one believes that government or private citizens should take care of society's "downtrodden." I'm guessing you think the latter; I just happen to think both are responsible.
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Remember liberals suport gun control and the conservitives of our time are far from the pharisies of our lords time , in fact we get labeled the "christian rigtht wing " all the time .
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
It's true that many "liberals" support gun control. It's also true that since 9/11 many "conservatives" support what the courts will probably decide are illegal invasions of privacy. Neither are reasons to abandon either ideology if it happens to be yours. We're never going to agree with EVERYTHING our leaders do, regardless of who our leaders are.

In general, strict conservatives--like the Pharisees, who WERE conservatives in the truest sense of the word--want to keep things the way they are. They seek to "conserve," to maintain the status quo, to resist change. Jesus was preaching that making burnt offerings at the Temple wasn't true Judaism, that what was true Judaism was loving your fellow man whether he was a righteous Jew or not. This represented BIG change and therefore it was blasphemy to the Pharisees who believed in Temple sacrifice.

It seems to me that resisting change is impossible. Take religion alone: Christianity branched off from Judaism, Protestantism branched off from Catholicism, Buddhism and Islam split into sects. If there's one thing that always stays the same in the human condition, it's change! That's the main problem for me personally with the conservative position. I think you and I can disagree on this and still love God, our families, the outdoors, and bowhunting. We just won't be able to talk politics much! <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
You have to admitt the pepole I mentioned in my first reply are losers and cry babies .
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
I think this all depends on how we measure winning and losing. Financially those folks are beating the pants off me!

I certainly WILL admit that I don't like their TV shows or the moral choices they've made about how to make a living.

Phew, thanks for reading this far! I figure I should stop using up bandwidth on things that are only tangentially related to hunting deer with bow and arrow!
<img src=icon_smile_blush.gif border=0 align=middle>

Respectfully yours.

Reply

0