ok, to start off i am in a hunting ethics class and the other day he gave us our final paper assignment: to read a philisophical paper that is either for or agaisnt hunting, then respond to it pointing out flaws and challenging it with the opposite view.
well the paper i drew was on the moral discrace of fox hunting in england
everything i have grown up to as a hunter is contrasted by fox hunting ie: you dont eat the fox, the dogs tear it up, not excactly respectful to the animal, and it is more of a social event than hunting...........
so i must now write a 7 page paper ACCEPTING fox hunting in terms of its morality.
what i need are some key morally acceptable points about fox hunting that i can expand upon in my paper. any suggestions?
feel free to say that im screwed, because it might very well be the truth