Thank you anti-fur people!

[dahermit]

Precisely, and that's why it's so important to make fur socially unacceptable.

Socially unacceptable or acceptable is not the point. The point is that there has been a related economic result for those who farm and those who (on the lower standard of living), who have been effected by people who are oblivious of the result of the anti-fur movement.

Nice ending to your post. Trapping is incredibly cruel to the trapped animal, if you have to kill a creature (human or animal) it should be done with the least amount of suffering possible.

You are demonstrating your ignorance of trapping methods. Can you say: "conibear"? Is all your "knowledge" of trapping derived from anti-fur commercials on T.V. showing some poor animal chewing its leg off? Just how long does a raccoon suffer when caught in a "220 conibear"? How long does a beaver suffer when caught in a 330 conibear? How long does a muskrat suffer after being caught with a 110 conibear or is caught with a single long spring on a float set? How long does a desperate poor person (and thier children), suffer when a portion of their already meager income is taken away by low (not worth the effort) fur prices?

Or, the central issue:

When the hell you going to get around to paying me for all the chickens and the geese that raccoons have destroyed? Also, my Amish neighbor Mark, wants to know when you are going to pay for the chickens he has lost to raccons. Much of his and his five children's living comes from subsistance farming; in case you have any empathy for humans too.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Socially unacceptable or acceptable is not the point. The point is that there has been a related economic result for those who farm and those who (on the lower standard of living), who have been effected by people who are oblivious of the result of the anti-fur movement.

Ending slavery caused economic hardships too, so? Ending the wholesale killing of the Great Auk (by their extinction), the end of buffalo slaughter, the end of child labor, and a nearly endless list of other groups that have been exploited for simple profit all caused economic hardships for someone. Despite your "sobbing lil' Mary" act, the economic consequences have been very small.

You are demonstrating your ignorance of trapping methods. Can you say: "conibear"? Is all your "knowledge" of trapping derived from anti-fur commercials on T.V. showing some poor animal chewing its leg off? Just how long does a raccoon suffer when caught in a "220 conibear"? How long does a beaver suffer when caught in a 330 conibear? How long does a muskrat suffer after being caught with a 110 conibear or is caught with a single long spring on a float set? How long does a desperate poor person (and thier children), suffer when a portion of their already meager income is taken away by low (not worth the effort) fur prices?

After you have died in one of those traps you can tell me about how kind and gentle they are.

Or, the central issue:

When the hell you going to get around to paying me for all the chickens and the geese that raccoons have destroyed? Also, my Amish neighbor Mark, wants to know when you are going to pay for the chickens he has lost to raccons. Much of his and his five children's living comes from subsistance farming; in case you have any empathy for humans too.

The check's in the mail. Did you get reimbursed for your slaves? Tell your Amish friend to become a vegan and stop raising chickens--that'll solve his problem.

 

[dahermit]

Ending slavery caused economic hardships too, so? Ending the wholesale killing of the Great Auk (by their extinction), the end of buffalo slaughter, the end of child labor, and a nearly endless list of other groups that have been exploited for simple profit all caused economic hardships for someone. Despite your "sobbing lil' Mary" act, the economic consequences have been very small.

And, as long as it is not your economic consequences there is not a problem.
The "economic consequences", go unreported inasmuch as there is no point in reporting how many bushels of corn are not produced. How many chickens are killed, how much sweet corn destroyed, how much fruit is lost, etc.
It is characteristically (of anti's) arrogant to pronounce, without proof how the result of excess populations of fur-bearers is "very small".

After you have died in one of those traps you can tell me about how kind and gentle they are.

It is obvious that no one can tell you anything. All deaths in nature are either violent and/or painful. Especially painful is the method I use to poison raccoons and and other scavengers.

I mix Coca Cola with Golden Malin fly bait (poison). The raccoons that drink it die an extremely painful death. If their population was reduced by trapping, I would not have to resort to that. I will do what I must do.
Traps are not kind and gentle. Killer traps (conibear), do not cause a death anymore painful than what nature and happenstance delivers to animals.

The check's in the mail. Did you get reimbursed for your slaves? Tell your Amish friend to become a vegan and stop raising chickens--that'll solve his problem.

And their sweet corn? And, by the way, he sells the eggs for income.
So, it would appear that you are intent upon forcing your silly-ass, new age vegan lifestyle upon the Amish also?

I also spray my orchard for insects. Insects are "life" also. Now let us hear you moral outrage for the massive amount of life that I am destroying in that endeavor. Or, is there not sufficient "cuteness" in that life form to evoke your self righteous rage.

 

[dahermit]

...Tell your Amish friend to become a vegan and stop raising chickens--that'll solve his problem...

With the glass house you live in and the people trying to dictate to you what is a proper life style, I am surprise that you are so willing to dictate to others your own particular view of ethical living.
With everything be said and done, your opinions are religious based inasmuch as you push the idea that "all life is sacred", therefore, "...thou shall not kill animals for their fur or eat them...". In my belief system (rabidly anti-religious), and the belief that no life is "sacred" (no such thing!) I live and let other people live the lifestyle they wish. Including you, and my very religious Amish neighbors.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

With the glass house you live in and the people trying to dictate to you what is a proper life style, I am surprise that you are so willing to dictate to others your own particular view of ethical living.
With everything be said and done, your opinions are religious based inasmuch as you push the idea that "all life is sacred", therefore, "...thou shall not kill animals for their fur or eat them...". In my belief system (rabidly anti-religious), and the belief that no life is "sacred" (no such thing!) I live and let other people live the lifestyle they wish. Including you, and my very religious Amish neighbors.

I wasn't dictating to your Amish friend, you whined about his losses and I told you how to solve the problem--it was a suggestion not a dictate.

Just remember when it is your turn to be killed for food or fur that your life is not sacred, nor is your corn's life. The 'coons have as much right to it as you do.

I'm not sure about the religious thing, respecting life just seems like a good idea to me. It's certainly not a Christian concept.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

And, as long as it is not your economic consequences there is not a problem.
The "economic consequences", go unreported inasmuch as there is no point in reporting how many bushels of corn are not produced. How many chickens are killed, how much sweet corn destroyed, how much fruit is lost, etc.
It is characteristically (of anti's) arrogant to pronounce, without proof how the result of excess populations of fur-bearers is "very small".

Okay, you've got the floor, prove that the consequences are anything but small. It's good to note that animal abusers always exaggerate the losses they suffer--according to the sheep farmers there has not been a single sheep lost to natural causes in human history, all the sheep have been killed by wolves or coyotes or some other predator.

It is obvious that no one can tell you anything. All deaths in nature are either violent and/or painful. Especially painful is the method I use to poison raccoons and and other scavengers. I mix Coca Cola with Golden Malin fly bait (poison). The raccoons that drink it die an extremely painful death.

So you are justifying traps by willfully doing something even more violent and painful to kill the animals? That is quintessential animal abuser reasoning.

So, it would appear that you are intent upon forcing your silly-ass, new age vegan lifestyle upon the Amish also?

Veganism has a long history in Christianity--read about the life of St. Francis and Friars Minor, early Christians were non-violent and ate no flesh.

I also spray my orchard for insects. Insects are "life" also. Now let us hear you moral outrage for the massive amount of life that I am destroying in that endeavor. Or, is there not sufficient "cuteness" in that life form to evoke your self righteous rage.

So far all the "rage" has been on your part, I don't need to rage. I'm not forcing my lifestyle on anyone--no more than you are trying to do.

 

[dahermit]

I wasn't dictating to your Amish friend, you whined about his losses and I told you how to solve the problem--it was a suggestion not a dictate.

Ignoring the statements about his sweet corn? Are you so stupid to think that raccoons do not destroy many things in gardens.

Just remember when it is your turn to be killed for food or fur that your life is not sacred, nor is your corn's life. The 'coons have as much right to it as you do.

My life is not sacred or have I ever stated that it was. You can harvest my fur anytime I come on your property and do damage. The raccoons did not buy the seed, plant the corn, or weed it. It is mine.

I'm not sure about the religious thing, respecting life just seems like a good idea to me. It's certainly not a Christian concept.

You are just as much of a disingenuous ass as those who have berated your life and person based on their religious beliefs. It is either religious or silly-ass emotion based on some illogical fondness for "cute" animals inasmuch as it rarely applies to spiders, scorpions, or snakes.

Remember to take that mouse out of the mouse trap.

 

[Gipper]

I'm not sure about the religious thing, respecting life just seems like a good idea to me. It's certainly not a Christian concept.

It most certainly is. You apparently know little about Christianity.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Ignoring the statements about his sweet corn? Are you so stupid to think that raccoons do not destroy many things in gardens.

My life is not sacred or have I ever stated that it was. You can harvest my fur anytime I come on your property and do damage. The raccoons did not buy the seed, plant the corn, or weed it. It is mine.

You are just as much of a disingenuous ass as those who have berated your life and person based on their religious beliefs. It is either religious or silly-ass emotion based on some illogical fondness for "cute" animals inasmuch as it rarely applies to spiders, scorpions, or snakes.

Remember to take that mouse out of the mouse trap.

Personal attacks on me don't make fur any more socially acceptable. If someone needs to protect their food, then that's a bit different than killing for money in my book.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

It most certainly is. You apparently know little about Christianity.

In the US there has NEVER been a person arrested protesting FOR war, all the arrests have been for protesting AGAINST war.

One must differentiate between the philosophy espoused by Jesus and the practice of Christianity today. In our culture there is no sanctity for life: look at our wars, legally selling cigarettes, abortion, etc. Hell, we don't even have uiversal health care or housing or food, we don't even have universal health care for infants and pregnant women, we don't have adequate care facilities for our veterans and aging population. Costa Rica has a better immunization record than the US, we don't even make the top ten in male or female longevity, live births, or prevention of heart disease. All of these things are true because we have a culture that loves money more than life.

The truth is that I know a great deal about Christianity--both the practice and the philosophy thereof.

 

[dahermit]

Personal attacks on me

...note that animal abusers always ...quintessential animal abuser reasoning...

If someone needs to protect their food, then that's a bit different than killing for money in my book.

What the F do you think this thread is about? Right from the start, it was not about killing animals for fur; it was the effect of what the anti-fur champaign has resulted in. There has been an explosion in the population of fur bearers, especially raccoons. I would have no problem with them if I had not lost my entire flock of chickens to 'coons and fox, the 'coon raids on goose eggs and baby geese, gave up raising strawberries because the 'coons beat me to them. Damage (broken branches), to my cherry trees from 'coons climbing them to get at the cherries. Jesus H. Christ! Read the beginning posts! I killed 16 'coons and several opossums last year. I have killed seven 'coons this year (the last today), and thrown them into a pit to rot. If they had been trapped last fall (not by me), I would not have to be killing and wasting that resource now.

Your posts begs the question: Is all life sacred? If so, insect life is also sacred and a farmer who uses pesticides is "killing for money" (less insects-higher yield-more money). You seem to dodge that flow of "all life has the right to live, logic".

 

[dahermit]

Personal attacks on me don't make fur any more socially acceptable. If someone needs to protect their food, then that's a bit different than killing for money in my book.

Are you "socially acceptable"? I do not care what society finds acceptable. Especially when that society is comprised of urbanites who concern themselves with the trite things in life like tattoos, electronic gadgets, celebrity gossip and have never had to scratch in the dirt for a living. Society is mostly comprised of dolts and fools.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Are you "socially acceptable"? I do not care what society finds acceptable. Especially when that society is comprised of urbanites who concern themselves with the trite things in life like tattoos, electronic gadgets, celebrity gossip and have never had to scratch in the dirt for a living. Society is mostly comprised of dolts and fools.

Yeah, yeah, everybody has it easy except you and you can't get ahead because you can't kill enough animals. Talk about a sob-sister story.

Whether I'm socially acceptable is irrelevant, fur has become unacceptable and you need to be like the buggy whip manufacturers and get over it.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Mare is back!!! How wonderful. Oh how I have missed you. And you are vegan...not surprised, but how do manage to get enough protein?

Now if only Shaman and Dorothy would return, all would be right in the world.

You asked about protein, Gip, here's an article about prolonging life by restricting protein intake. Read at least the first two pages... it seems that vegans have the upper hand.

 

[dahermit]

Yeah, yeah, everybody has it easy except you and you can't get ahead because you can't kill enough animals. Talk about a sob-sister story.

Whether I'm socially acceptable is irrelevant, fur has become unacceptable and you need to be like the buggy whip manufacturers and get over it.

"Your posts begs the question: Is all life sacred? If so, insect life is also sacred and a farmer who uses pesticides is "killing for money" (less insects-higher yield-more money). You seem to dodge that flow of "all life has the right to live, logic". "
__________________

Since you choose to ignore (again), the underling question above, and shift the focus of the thread, we can only assume your anti-fur stance comes from the emotional response to "cute" animals dying as opposed to the "ugly" ones. It remains that if it were tarantulas being clubbed to death on the ice instead of cute, white baby seals, you anti-fur people would not voice a complaint. In the end you have shown to be a disingenuous ass hole. Now the mods may eliminate me from this forum. I leave it to you to be the chief "contributor."