From: black@che.serum.kodak.com (Robert Black (x37236))
Subject: Re: Letter to John Robinson
Organization: Clinical Products Division, Eastman Kodak Company
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 17:16:59 GMT

In article <1992Jul17.110048.6563@ac.dal.ca> robinson@ac.dal.ca writes:
>In article <1992Jul16.161229.20082@clpd.kodak.com>, black@che.serum.kodak.com (Robert Black (x37236)) writes:
>> In article <1992Jul14.112456.6502@ac.dal.ca> robinson@ac.dal.ca writes:
>>>In article <1992Jul13.174125.41518@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>, dreamer@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (David Caruso II ~~~) writes:
>> 
>> 
>> John Robinson wrote to David Caruso II:
>>>......  Would you think more highly of hunters if they dragged their 
>>>heels as they went into the woods, reluctant to dicharge a distateful 
>>>duty?
>> 
>> 				YES
>
>Well some people think that one shouldn't have fun dancing, one shouldn't 
>have fun drinking, and one definately shouldn't have fun in the bedroom.  In 
>fact, when one digs a little deeper, such people feel that no one should ever 
>have fun doing much of anything.  Are you one of these people?

Quite the contrary.  In fact I'm ESPECIALLY fond of Canadian bars.

>
>I take a different view.

Good, we agree on something.  Let's meet in a Niagara Falls, Ontario bar
sometime and hash out our differences over some cold ones.  It was years
ago in an Ontario bar when the music was loud, the place was packed, the
crowd was raucous, the entertainment was lively and the drinks were
flowing freely, that I had my first great flash of insight into what
Rousseau was talking about.  :-)

>  For me, it is not important to do work that I 
>enjoy.  It is important for me to be able to find aspects of my work that I 
>do enjoy.  Fun is where you find it.  It seems absurd to me to suggest that 
>people should spend their leisure time doing something they don't enjoy.
>
>People who suggest that one should not enjoy any recreational activity are 
>silly.

Agreed.  Who are these people, so we can gang up on them?

>  Where you, and I suspect others, get confused, is in equating 
>hunting with killing.

Actually Mr.  Linan disabused me of this notion several months ago. 
After that I thought I knew about the difference, until our Spanish
philosopher made another cameo appearance and prceeded to cloud the
issue.  :-)

>  Your previous posts indicate to me that you see 
>little if any difference between these two activities.

What previous posts? What difference does it make if I see any
difference? I do, but what if I didn't? How is it relevant? It's the
killing part of hunting that is controversial.  Certainly you can see
that? If you wanted to spend all your time trudging through the
woods, tracking animals, studying their habits, photographing them, ... 
whatever, ...  even humanely finishing off dying animals that you
encountered along the way - if you just participated in these types of
activities and other comparable ones, then the entire controversy would
dissolve away. 

But when you take the life of a conscious, thinking, feeling, living
being which has moral rights and which may coexist in a complex social
structure with others having rights, then you are committing a
morally-significant action, whether you choose to realize it or not. 
And if you choose not to realize it, then it falls to others to speak
for the voiceless ones. 

Additionally, if you were in the US, you would be killing something
that at least partially "belongs to" others, since the Supreme
Court has ruled a long time ago that wildlife is a national treasure
belonging to everyone.  (I don't know if this is true in Canada.)


>  As much as I would 
>like to correct this misunderstanding on your part, I don't think I can.  You 
>see, I almost suspect its a deliberate misunderstanding, and as such, not 
>correctible.

First, don't give up so easily.  Secondly, would it clarify these
discussions if we divided "hunting" up into its two components: (1)
animal-killing, and (2) everything else?  You can select a word for 
the second component.  Then maybe it will be more clear which aspect
of hunting is relevant at a particular point in any discussion.

---
Robert Black 
black@serum.kodak.com  - The ONLY email address that MIGHT work.
These views are not necessarily the views of my employers.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals