Community Chat

[gmkb]

Your niece doesn't understand the issue.  There is a huge difference between killing for sport, which ultimately benefits no one, and eating meat from animals that God put here to feed us all.  Had that lion been running free, he would have had to kill another animal to survive.  

[Melania]

Greenhouse wrote:

There was outrage because Cecile was known and  has a story, yes.  He wasn't more valuable than any other animal hunted down, tortured, killed, skinned and beheaded. But, because of his notoriety, attention was brought to the larger issue.  

---

He was an endangered species...big difference. BIG! *eyeroll*

[Justice4all]

@gmkb   This is a matter of deepening empathy and personal choice.

[reiki604]

---

@Greenhouse wrote:

There was outrage because Cecile was known and  has a story, yes.  He wasn't more valuable than any other animal hunted down, tortured, killed, skinned and beheaded. But, because of his notoriety, attention was brought to the larger issue.  

---

And there was much handwringing yesterday when it was thought that Jericho was killed. The reality is anothother male lion was killed and his pride is left at risk but there was palpable relief that it wasn't Jericho. The same outrage and reaction should have been shown towards this unnamed lion but instead it was relief.

Where is the outcry that we must find the murderer of this unnamed lion and where is the  effort to do so?

[novamc1]

My opinion (or a fact of life on this earth) is that living organisms eating other organisms is part of the essential food chain that  enables creatures to survive and  creates life for all living organisms in the first place.

  When hunger strikes, even humans have been eaten by other humans (including at the early settlement of Jamestown, VA, centuries ago, because the settlers were starving and none of these immigrants had a clue about growing their own food)

While hunting for animal trophies to hang on a wall or brag about is a weird and ugly thing to me, raising and eating livestock is a part of our food chain, and I doubt even the strictest vegetarian can argue against the total food chain, even though perhaps they would like to.

I'd welcome a strict vegetarian's opinion on this.

[GingerPeach]

---

@reiki604 wrote:

---

@Greenhouse wrote:

There was outrage because Cecile was known and  has a story, yes.  He wasn't more valuable than any other animal hunted down, tortured, killed, skinned and beheaded. But, because of his notoriety, attention was brought to the larger issue.  

---

And there was much handwringing yesterday when it was thought that Jericho was killed. The reality is anothother male lion was killed and his pride is left at risk but there was palpable relief that it wasn't Jericho. The same outrage and reaction should have been shown towards this unnamed lion but instead it was relief.

Where is the outcry that we must find the murderer of this unnamed lion and where is the  effort to do so?

---

We don't have to be outraged about every single thing.  The fact is that Cecil's murder was a "tipping point."  We trust change will happen.

Even in the midst of wars, people are not outraged at every death.  That would be exhausting.  It doesn't mean no one cares.

It's hard to understand why some of these arguments pop up.  Are people trying to derail the momentum?  Do they not grasp the bigger picture?  

[betteb]

---

@biancardi wrote:

no, it isn't hypocritical.  I eat meat, but I have been very conscious about where I purchase my meat and how the animals are treated prior to the kill.     I have been very aware of the horrible practices done by commercial livestock farming and I have disagreed with it for decades.   This requires action by the people, because the big companies aren't going to change - you have to petition your reps if you care about it.

I can CARE about both and still eat meat.  That doesn't make me  a hypocrite, although I am sure some will immediatly jump on this thread and call me one. 

Big game trophy hunting, along with other blood "sports" with animals, is disgusting and cruel.  The money doesn't go to the village and no, it is not a time honored tradition ~ not to the indigenous people, it isn't ~ they kill either for food and use the animal completely, or if the animal is attacking their village.   Big game trophy hunting is a rich man's sport.  Yes, there are poachers who kill animals and sell the body parts to some Asian countries, as they believe those parts are medicial - THAT needs to stop as well - that is ALSO a rich man's vice (to use those expensive bits & pieces from the animal)

The dentist poached.  He was there when he witnessed them lure Cecil out of the protected area, and since he initially shot Cecil with a bow, he had to have noticed the GPS tracker.  Cecil suffered for 40 hours ~ they could have called the authorities to help Cecil once they knew this was a protected lion.   When they finally killed him, they stripped off the GPS collar ~ so they KNEW this lion was protected  at this time (if they weren't sure before) and yet, they never called the authorities

The farmer whose land that they lured Cecil onto (as it was next to the reserve) did not have a licence to hunt lions.

Yes, you can eat meat and CARE without being hypocritical.  I am not sure why this strawman argument keeps cropping up all the time.    People can walk and chew gum at the same time.    Animal activists have been very vocal about big game hunting (and yes, I know what occurs here in the states and have signed petitions, talked to my reps about it) but now with the murder of Cecil, more people are aware of the heinous nature of this so-called sport.

The only commonality between how commercial livestock is treated and poaching is that one is still legal and the other is illegal.    If people want to outlaw inhumane treatment of livestock (and don't tell us not to eat meat), that is a totally different topic, as that is legal and laws need to be created .  We already have laws on poaching.

---

********************************************************************8

[reiki604]

---

@GingerPeach wrote:

---

@reiki604 wrote:

---

@Greenhouse wrote:

There was outrage because Cecile was known and  has a story, yes.  He wasn't more valuable than any other animal hunted down, tortured, killed, skinned and beheaded. But, because of his notoriety, attention was brought to the larger issue.  

---

And there was much handwringing yesterday when it was thought that Jericho was killed. The reality is anothother male lion was killed and his pride is left at risk but there was palpable relief that it wasn't Jericho. The same outrage and reaction should have been shown towards this unnamed lion but instead it was relief.

Where is the outcry that we must find the murderer of this unnamed lion and where is the  effort to do so?

---

We don't have to be outraged about every single thing.  The fact is that Cecil's murder was a "tipping point."  We trust change will happen.

Even in the midst of wars, people are not outraged at every death.  That would be exhausting.  It doesn't mean no one cares.

It's hard to understand why some of these arguments pop up.  Are people trying to derail the momentum?  Do they not grasp the bigger picture?  

---

The only response I can give you is SMH. The only way to derail momentum is to become indifferent to the problem. One death is no more important or horrific than another. If the true cost of war was driven home perhaps humanity would not be so eager to go to war.

[Justice4all]

In the extremes, such as Arctic hunters, there have been no alternatives to hunting.  And scientists have measured "feeling" activity in plants.  So watcha gonna do?  Eat air?  Although, with all the pollution, the air is sometimes like pea soup!!