From: linan@argon.berkeley.edu (Mike Linan)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Hunters needed
Date: 30 Sep 1992 17:58:08 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: argon.berkeley.edu


Subject: Re: Hunters needed

In article <1992Sep30.012232.2729@convex.com> jjohnson@convex.com (Jennifer L. Johnson) writes:

>Mike Linan writes:


>(me)
>>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.


>>>He probably doesn't feel they are worth wasting his breath over.  You will
>>>have to admit that any ARF who is fanatical enought to pay hundreds of
>>>dollars to attend some political rally    	      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>Huh?  First, the Texas Conference for the Animals is not a political rally;
>it could be more aptly called a support group.  Second, where the hell did
>you get this idea about hundreds of dollars.  I registered early; it cost
>a whopping $65, including meals.  At the door on the day the conference
>starts, it'll cost $80 to register (for the Conference, NOT for the debate,
>which is FREE).  For me $65 isn't out of line for a weekend's entertainment
>plus meals.  


Oh excuse me.  I didn't know the airlines were going to ship us all down 
there for free Jennifer.  Call it what you like but it seems to me that
the issue of animal rights is a political (hence the title talk.politics.
animals) one and you can call you conference a tea party for all I care
but, it will still be a political rally.


>>>begin to listen to an opposing viewpoint.  Even though I'll bet very few of
>>>them have the slightest idea of what hunting and hunters are all about but,
>>>rather have a perception born of the brainwashing propaganda spread by the
>>>likes of PETA and other such illminded clans.

>Then show up and set us straight.  I'll bet very few of you hunters have the
>slightest idea of what the animal rights movement is all about but, rather
>have a perception based solely on folklore and tradition, tradition that says
>"men have always hunted, so it must be okay," tradition that constipates the
>progress of ideas, and causes humans to hang on to their neanderthal past as
>predators.  In my book, brainwashed beats brain-absent.  "Open your mind,"
>says Archie Bunker, "and someone will come along and shove alot of crap in
>there." 


Brainwashed you are and you can label us as brain-absent if you like but you
really need to ask yourself if we really give a damn what someone like you
who calls us scum, brain-absent meanderthals.  I for one couldn't care less
what you think and only post to this group to educate those who want to learn
what hunters are all about and "set straight" people like you and Russell
Lawrence.


>>So what`s the real reason we can't find even two hunters out of the bunch who

>>>First you need to realize that our views are not subject to testing.  ...

>You need to realize that if you want to convince people you're right, you
>must subject your views to microscopic scrutiny.  Imagine a presidential
>candidate taking this stand.  "Very well, Mr. Bush.  Mr. Clinton, would you
>care to share _your_ views with us...."


That's just it Jennifer.  It would be great if you people (ARFs) would listen
to reason but, more often than not your minds are made up that you are the
ethically "right" ones and there is no changing your arrogant position.  A
good example is you terming hunters "scum".  Ultimately, with an attitude
like yours, I don't give a sh_t what you think.


>>Or are hunters afraid to test beliefs based largely on
>>tradition and myth against the well-founded arguments of Ingrid and Wayne?

>>>Oh well Jennifer, you hit the nail on the head.  I'm sure I speak for all
>>>hunters when I say we are just terrified at the thought of such a test 
>>>with ol Ingrid and Wayne.  :-)  

>If no hunter shows up at the debate, lots of folks will believe just that,
>that out of all the hunters in the state of Texas (and elsewhere), not one
>has the testicular fortitude to argue for the pro-hunting side.  Pretty sad.


Again, like we should care what you guys think.  Keep your testicals to your-
self.  What is truly sad is that poor deluded people such as yourself really
believe we have an obligation to argue with you fanatics.  Dream on.


>>>But seriously, why don't you just test
>>>your views and beliefs against those of Charles Manson.  Seems to be the
>>>same thing to me.  Charlie, Ingrid and Wayne are all nuts IMO.

>Save the juvenile rantings for your buddies, please.  


Jennifer, I felt you would enjoy my honesty.  Obviously I was wrong and you
have taken offense.  Too bad.


>>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.

>>>Yeah, well good Jennifer.  While you are there, think of me and the fact 
>>>that I will be enjoying the natural world while hunting.  And by the way,
>>>you just don't know how hurt I am that some disillusioned, out of touch
>>>person has label me (as a hunter) a coward.  How can I go on?  :-)

>I honestly don't know how anyone could deliberately and needlessly take the
>life of an animal and "go on."  I know I couldn't.


No one is asking you to.  What I find amusing and annoying is that you people
feel you have the right to make us stop.  You feel it is needless, we do not.
Are you so arrogant that you feel you OPINION is better than ours?  You must.

> Jennifer L. Johnson | "Custom will reconcile people to any atrocity."



Mike Linan