Hunting has ceased to be a necessity in our culture since about 1901, which marks the date of the first American hunting licence tendered by the state of Utah. From that time, hunting has been considered a sporting event. Is it wrong to kill animals for sport, but still make them into sausage? Could we be justified by the need for the thrill of the chase and sausage? Or could it be our privilege and right?
Lets go back in time for some clues:
You are living in 1966: the media and populace are unstable while the war in Vietnam drags on, the elections are coming up, and the main parties have built, and are still building their campaigns. In order to create a loyal following, the great abhorrence of cruelty, bloodshed, and violence, feelings that are widespread, are used to mould misguided causes based on feelings and emotions. The Vietnam veterans felt the brunt of this abhorrence, but these same feelings were channeled into the anti-hunting/preservationist parties. What the average supporter, of these preservationist and anti-hunting organisations fail to realize is that: they, being a large organised group of people, hold considerable political power, having been indoctrinated in extreme beliefs (for example "the shooting of an elk for sport or fun, is cruel and violent in the extreme") will vote for the candidate that appears to advocate their "righteous" cause, this is the political scheme of things. In the end there are three answers I get from this post, and here they are.
And God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and of the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Gen 1:26
"The reality is that cruelty for fun is no longer acceptable to the overwhelming majority of people in this country" - Tony Benn
I don't care.
Now I know that a short post like this leaves a lot unsaid, but please feel free to post comments.