From: achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: Hunters Needed
Date: 29 Sep 92 14:50:56 GMT
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center

In article <1992Sep28.223431.4626@convex.com> jjohnson@convex.com (Jenifer L. Johnson) writes:
>> 
>>              HUNTERS and ANTI-ANIMAL RIGHTISTS
>>      The Fund For Animals invites YOU to the third Bi-Annual
>>              TEXAS CONFERENCE FOR THE ANIMALS
>> 
>>               SUBJECT:  Sport Hunting
>> 
>>When:   Friday evening, October 2 at 8:00 P.M.  (Kicking off the
>>                                                    Conference)
>> Where:  Austin, Texas at Red Lion Hotel
>> 
>>The public is invited to this event.  However, as of this posting, no one has
>>stepped forward to take them on in public - _even_ after a comprehensive
>>search.  Furthermore, several hunting advocates have backed out of the debate
>>after first accepting the invitation.
>> 
>This event was scheduled to coincide with the Texas Parks & Wildlife Dept.'s
>Hunting Expo, also in Austin next weekend.  According to an article in
>yesterday's Dallas Morning News, ~700 hunters were registered for the TP&W
>awards banquet.  That means that at least 700 hunters have chosen to be at the
>Expo rather than in the woods on the opening day of bow season.
>
>Included in those 700 are Ted Nugent, self-proclaimed hunting advocate, George
>W. Bush, and Nolan Ryan.  The Morning News article said that Nugent will be
>performing a 30-minute mini-concert to attract attention to his anti-drug,
>pro-hunting message directed at kids, and quoted Nugent as saying, "The kids
>listen to me because I play rock n' roll, and I speak the truth with great
>passion.  It works like magic."
>
>If Nugent believes his message "works like magic," then why does he refuse to
>participate in the FoA debate?  It's certainly not because he's going to be
>busy bowhunting that day.
>
>So what`s the real reason we can't find even two hunters out of the bunch who
>are willing to test their views against two members of the opposition?  If the
>leaders of the AR movement are simply disseminators of misinformation,
>wouldn't this be a wonderful opportunity for those level-headed hunters to
>give us the facts?  Or are hunters afraid to test beliefs based largely on
>tradition and myth against the well-founded arguments of Ingrid and Wayne?
>
>I'll be in Austin for the Conference and for the debate, so I can post a
>followup as to whether any of those ~700 noble, level-headed hunters could
>muster the conviction and the courage to stand up to a bunch of gullible,
>Bambi-worshipping vegetarians.  My guess is that the hunters will prove
>themselves to be the cowards we AR folks suspect they are.
>

What point would there be in getting up to debate in front of a bunch of 
people whose minds are already made up? Hunters are more interested in 
the opininions of non-hunters than anti-hunters. If I may use an analogy,
did Martin Luther King address KKK rallies? Hunters have been abused, both
verbally and physically by antihunters. I have been to rallies of other 
types, such as anti-nuclear power rallies, where there was supposed to be
a debate. Typically, the minority (sounds like that will be the hunters in
this case) were shouted down by rude jerks who would not even listen to an
opposing point of view. Nothing useful was accomplished, but these closed
minds went around slapping each other on the back over their supposed 
victories. Ever watch Morton Downey's late night talk show? I envision a
similar environment. You can't debate a zealot.

Jeff Achenbach
achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com                    
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals