Frontline 22/03/10

nesf

The mudslinging between the huntsmen and the animal rights people is bemusing.

mike65

the huntsmen love animals and the animal rights people hate humans, is how this sort of thing ends up as a rule.

nesf

This is the worse audience heckling and abuse for each other I've seen yet on this show. Trust the hippies to lower the tone..

JonathanAnon

I got bitten by a dog earlier this year.. I think both the dogs and their owners should be put down.

Bob_Harris

The one in the audience with white flower in her hair was a slamming hottie.

sron

Frontline finally lets Pat Kenny live his dream of leading the rabblement.

I haven't really learned anything from this show, though it's mildly entertaining.

BlaasForRafa

nesf wrote: »

The mudslinging between the huntsmen and the animal rights people is bemusing.

The huntsmen in general seemed quite calm and polite whereas the animal-rights types in the audience were generally "rabble rabble rabble rabble"

As for that farmer from south kilkenny, he was by far the most annoying, I was wishing he'd just stfu as his voice was so irritating.

Laminations

I thought the Fine Gael senator was a joke. Regulate the 'sport' to remove the cruel elements? The entire practice is cruel! And then she blabbered on with a terrible slippery slope argument bringing up other bills rather than discussing the merits of the one being proposed. And no one from the hunt gave a good reason as to why drag hunting is not a good enough substitute.

BlaasForRafa

Laminations wrote: »

I thought the Fine Gael senator was a joke. Regulate the 'sport' to remove the cruel elements? The entire practice is cruel! And then she blabbered on with a terrible slippery slope argument bringing up other bills rather than discussing the merits of the one being proposed. And no one from the hunt gave a good reason as to why drag hunting is not a good enough substitute.

They did give a good reason, its not as exciting and not as fun.

And as for it being cruel, give me a break. Slaughterhouses are far more "cruel" to animals, are you going to ban those as well?

ei.sdraob

it was cruel on anyone who watched that terrible episode

whynotwhycanti

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

They did give a good reason, its not as exciting and not as fun.

And as for it being cruel, give me a break. Slaughterhouses are far more "cruel" to animals, are you going to ban those as well?

Yes but slaughterhouses are there to process animals and then provide meat for the population. I'm not saying slaughterhouses are not cruel but what is there functiona and their purpose in comparison to hunting. Hunting is a sport, and you said it yourself, its for excitement and fun. There is a big difference.

BlaasForRafa

whynotwhycanti wrote: »

Yes but slaughterhouses are there to process animals and then provide meat for the population. I'm not saying slaughterhouses are not cruel but what is there functiona and their purpose in comparison to hunting. Hunting is a sport, and you said it yourself, its for excitement and fun. There is a big difference.

So if they weren't having fun it would be ok?

whynotwhycanti

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

So if they weren't having fun it would be ok?

What???

I do not understand what is your point. Mine was quite simple, hunting is a sport undertaken for fun or excitment. The slaughter of animals in abbattoirs is an industry in place to provide suppliers with meat products. They are two completely diffrent things.

Nodin

nesf wrote: »

This is the worse audience heckling and abuse for each other I've seen yet on this show. Trust the hippies to lower the tone..

Though originally anti fox and stag hunting (with the hounds) it has to be said that over the years, these anti-hunt people have come to irk me. Theres far too many of them that seem to think meat comes off trees, or that have no idea of what peoples relationships to animals are like in agriculture.

Laminations

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

They did give a good reason, its not as exciting and not as fun.

Thats not a good reason. Firstly how is a drag hunt less exciting and fun? I could argue joyriding is a more exciting and fun way to drive a car, it doesn't justify it. It could be far more exciting and fun to chase people without their consent rather than organise a game of tag. Doesn't make that right. The supposed fun and excitement these people get from chasing an animal sometimes to death should not outweigh the rights of that animal.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

And as for it being cruel, give me a break. Slaughterhouses are far more "cruel" to animals, are you going to ban those as well?

There is a world of difference between a civilised society providing sustenance in as humane a way as possible and scaring or harming animals for sport.

BlaasForRafa

Nodin wrote: »

Though originally anti fox and stag hunting (with the hounds) it has to be said that over the years, these anti-hunt people have come to irk me. Theres far too many of them that seem to think meat comes off trees, or that have no idea of what peoples relationships to animals are like in agriculture.

Something that I can agree with you on. The militant vegan types are a complete pain in the hole. They want to impose they're lentil addled view of the world on everyone else and getting rid of hunting is the first stage in doing that.

Laminations

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

So if they weren't having fun it would be ok?

If they weren't having fun they wouldn't be doing it. Thats the whole point, and the difference between this 'sport' and slaughter houses. Now maybe there is the odd farmer who has fun killing their animals but i doubt it, they do if out of necessity as part of their job so making silly comparisons between hunting and farming, culling or putting animals down out of compassion is comparing apples and oranges.
If they didnt hunt for fun would it make it ok? Yep because it would make it extinct.

Laminations

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Something that I can agree with you on. The militant vegan types are a complete pain in the hole. They want to impose they're lentil addled view of the world on everyone else and getting rid of hunting is the first stage in doing that.

I'm not a huge fan of vegans, I think they have very odd ideas of what we should eat and how we should behave. Saying that, i'm less of a fan of slippery slope arguments. Argue this issue on its own and not against some possible future where we'd all be forced to eat leaves and stones. I'm anti hunting but pro omnivory. This bill does not infringe one bit on my right to eat meat. If and when there is a bill that does i'll argue against it.

BlaasForRafa

Laminations wrote: »

Thats not a good reason. Firstly how is a drag hunt less exciting and fun? I could argue joyriding is a more exciting and fun way to drive a car, it doesn't justify it. It could be far more exciting and fun to chase people without their consent rather than organise a game of tag. Doesn't make that right. The supposed fun and excitement these people get from chasing an animal sometimes to death should not outweigh the rights of that animal.



There is a world of difference between a civilised society providing sustenance in as humane a way as possible and scaring or harming animals for sport.

Have you ever been in a slaughterhouse? Cattle do not "go gently into that good night" as it were.

We kill many many times more animals for food than hunters will ever kill, yet because something is for fun then is wrong, hmmm

whynotwhycanti

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Have you ever been in a slaughterhouse? Cattle do not "go gently into that good night" as it were.

We kill many many times more animals for food than hunters will ever kill, yet because something is for fun then is wrong, hmmm

I have been to many slaughterhouses and they are not nice places. It still does not take away from the fact that the killing of animals for food and the killing of animals for sport are completely different things, yet you feel they are utterly comparable.

bmaxi

I can't understand this comparison between hunting and slaughtering. Sure the end result is the same but the means is vastly different.
I've been to slaughterhouses and granted it is not a nice experience but I can't recall one instance of a terrified animal being chased to exhaustion and then torn limb from limb by the butcher.

Absurdum

Nodin wrote: »

Though originally anti fox and stag hunting (with the hounds) it has to be said that over the years, these anti-hunt people have come to irk me. Theres far too many of them that seem to think meat comes off trees, or that have no idea of what peoples relationships to animals are like in agriculture.

It would be safe to assume that they know exactly where meat comes from, which is why most of them would choose not to consume it.

delop

I grew up on a farm and I saw distressed animals quite a bit, for example when its time to dose animals...

The only time Ive ever been distressed was in the 80's I helped my father bring an animal to the slaughter house, and while he was chatting to a guy he met, I went for a walk around to have a look, i came across an Iraqi worker who was killing animals in accordance with his religion. basically the animal could not be stunned with the bolt gun, the animals neck was slit by the Iraqi, it tried to scream, was hooked by the hind leg and swung upside down, it took it a while to die, in full view of the next candidits while they all screamed smelling the blood... What I remember was their wide eyes...

That to me seemed cruel , Should we ban the export of meat to Muslim countries

I like steak so I will take no position

longhalloween

Bob_Harris wrote: »

The one in the audience with white flower in her hair was a slamming hottie.

YES!!! +1 to you sir. There was another one in the audiance wearing a black cardigan, I think she was sitting behind the ex-hunt guy with the paddy cap.

Bottle_of_Smoke

delop wrote: »

I grew up on a farm and I saw distressed animals quite a bit, for example when its time to dose animals...

The only time Ive ever been distressed was in the 80's I helped my father bring an animal to the slaughter house, and while he was chatting to a guy he met, I went for a walk around to have a look, i came across an Iraqi worker who was killing animals in accordance with his religion. basically the animal could not be stunned with the bolt gun, the animals neck was slit by the Iraqi, it tried to scream, was hooked by the hind leg and swung upside down, it took it a while to die, in full view of the next candidits while they all screamed smelling the blood... What I remember was their wide eyes...

That to me seemed cruel , Should we ban the export of meat to Muslim countries

I like steak so I will take no position

I think he was doing it wrong. It is true they don't use the stun gun but if done correctly halal butchering shouldn't be any more painful than western methods. They cut the jugular, so like slitting someone's throat, if done right the initial wound will hurt but as the blood pours out you die very quickly. Perhaps the guy you saw wasn't cutting the jugular deep/wide enough.

whynotwhycanti wrote:

Yes but slaughterhouses are there to process animals and then provide meat for the population. I'm not saying slaughterhouses are not cruel but what is there functiona and their purpose in comparison to hunting. Hunting is a sport, and you said it yourself, its for excitement and fun. There is a big difference.

bmaxi wrote:

I can't understand this comparison between hunting and slaughtering. Sure the end result is the same but the means is vastly different.

The cruelty is the same, the death is the same. Although it must be noted animals who die in slaughterhouses will go through a lot more drawn out suffering.

We don't need meat to survive, therefore its entertainment; like hunting.

bmaxi wrote:

I've been to slaughterhouses and granted it is not a nice experience but I can't recall one instance of a terrified animal being chased to exhaustion and then torn limb from limb by the butcher.

I've seen hunts and granted it is not a nice experience but I can't recall one instance of a huntsman forcing an animal to sit motionless in a tiny cage for weeks on end.

Different types of cruelty, but still cruelty.

BlaasForRafa

bmaxi wrote: »

I can't understand this comparison between hunting and slaughtering. Sure the end result is the same but the means is vastly different.
I've been to slaughterhouses and granted it is not a nice experience but I can't recall one instance of a terrified animal being chased to exhaustion and then torn limb from limb by the butcher.

As you said, the end result is sometimes the same. Why should the means matter, hundreds of thousands of animals are killed every year in slaughterhouses, there are approx 120 hunts every year that hunt live animals and not all of them would end up dead, the one stag hunt in contention (the Ward Union) dosen't even kill the stag in normal circumstances.

So perhaps 100 animal deaths a year versus hundreds of thousands yet hunting is somehow worse than slaughtering, that just dosen't make sense to me.

BaZmO*

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

We don't need meat to survive, therefore its entertainment; like hunting.

How is it entertainment? That makes no sense whatsoever.

Laminations

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

As you said, the end result is sometimes the same. Why should the means matter, hundreds of thousands of animals are killed every year in slaughterhouses, there are approx 120 hunts every year that hunt live animals and not all of them would end up dead, the one stag hunt in contention (the Ward Union) dosen't even kill the stag in normal circumstances.

So perhaps 100 animal deaths a year versus hundreds of thousands yet hunting is somehow worse than slaughtering, that just dosen't make sense to me.

One is done for a purpose. Like if someone gets gangrene a doctor has a legitimate reason to amputate the limb, this doesn't mean that we can go around amputating limbs for other more trivial purposes.

We are omnivorous animals, we are food generalists and we hunted for our food. With the agricultural revolution and the domestication of animals we found more humane ways to 'grow' our food (veg and meat) and eliminated the need for hunting, this did not eliminate our need for food.

whynotwhycanti

Laminations wrote: »

With the agricultural revolution and the domestication of animals we found more humane ways to 'grow' our food (veg and meat) and eliminated the need for hunting, this did not eliminate our need for food.

This is it, in general, we have eliminated our use for hunting. We could argue that the new method of domesticated stock is worse than hunting animals in the wild but that is a different debate. In the end of the day, hunters in Ireland do it for sport, and partake nowadays in a hobbie that was once the necessity for survival. There were alot of different things humans did back then for survival but you don't see me partaking in them as some sort of activity.

BlaasForRafa

BaZmO* wrote: »

How is it entertainment? That makes no sense whatsoever.

Perhaps he mean unnecessary. Certainly in terms of nutrition we could replace meat with other things and not lose out in terms of vitamins, amino acids, proteins etc.

BlaasForRafa

Laminations wrote: »

One is done for a purpose. Like if someone gets gangrene a doctor has a legitimate reason to amputate the limb, this doesn't mean that we can go around amputating limbs for other more trivial purposes.

We are omnivorous animals, we are food generalists and we hunted for our food. With the agricultural revolution and the domestication of animals we found more humane ways to 'grow' our food (veg and meat) and eliminated the need for hunting, this did not eliminate our need for food.

We don't need meat.

We eat meat because we like it, not for any nutritional need. Meat is actually probably detrimental to human health rather than a benefit, its just that we enjoy it. Just like some people enjoy hunting.

whynotwhycanti

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Certainly in terms of nutrition we could replace meat with other things and not lose out in terms of vitamins, amino acids, proteins etc.

Thats very true

Laminations

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

We don't need meat.

Thats another argument completely and far more debatable than whether we need hunting.

bmaxi

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

As you said, the end result is sometimes the same. Why should the means matter, hundreds of thousands of animals are killed every year in slaughterhouses, there are approx 120 hunts every year that hunt live animals and not all of them would end up dead, the one stag hunt in contention (the Ward Union) dosen't even kill the stag in normal circumstances.

So perhaps 100 animal deaths a year versus hundreds of thousands yet hunting is somehow worse than slaughtering, that just dosen't make sense to me.

This is a line trotted out over and over by hunt supporters, who presumably, are all vegetarian and it hasn't gained any more merit from the first time I heard it.
I'm pretty sure that any of us, with death impending, would choose a quick despatch rather than the added mental ordeal of a "will he, won't he, catch me?" situation and maybe if someone took the time to explain to the stag, that all these baying hounds were harmless and really only out for a run in the country, he'd be alright with that.

fontanalis

If these muppets get started with hunting the next thing will be fishing.

fontanalis

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

We don't need meat.

We eat meat because we like it, not for any nutritional need. Meat is actually probably detrimental to human health rather than a benefit, its just that we enjoy it. Just like some people enjoy hunting.

Imagine our ancestors discovered meat, how would we have turned out? I shudder.

nacho libre

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Have you ever been in a slaughterhouse? Cattle do not "go gently into that good night" as it were.

We kill many many times more animals for food than hunters will ever kill, yet because something is for fun then is wrong, hmmm

so do you feel it is acceptable to kill any animal regardless of the circumstances?
for instance, if i repeatedly kick a dog in the stomach because i get enjoyment out of it, is that cruel or perfectly acceptable. is it not inconsistent to justify killing some animals for fun and reacting with outrage to the suffering and killing of others?

BlaasForRafa

nacho libre wrote: »

so do you feel it is acceptable to kill any animal regardless of the circumstances?
for instance, if i repeatedly kick a dog in the stomach because i get enjoyment out of it, is that cruel or perfectly acceptable. is it not inconsistent to justify killing some animals for fun and reacting with outrage to the suffering and killing of others?

I couldn't give a flying crap what you do. I know I wouldn't kick a dog in the stomach however.

nacho libre

Laminations wrote: »

Thats another argument completely and far more debatable than whether we need hunting.

well to be fair it's a good point. a lions eats meat to survive because it has to we don't need to do so.

so if you are of the view that all animals are deserving of life as we are, then how can you defend killing one, when you have an alternative means of survival, just because you enjoy the taste of meat.

Laminations

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I couldn't give a flying crap what you do. I know I wouldn't kick a dog in the stomach however.

But you would chase a defenseless animal, possibly to death, just for sh!ts and giggles. Yeah you are of far more decent character.

nacho libre

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I couldn't give a flying crap what you do. I know I wouldn't kick a dog in the stomach however.

is that because you like dogs and would see doing so as cruel? you might not care, but others who are dog lovers and also hunt would.
my point is why sentimentalize one animal over another, if hunting is justified on the grounds that animals are inferior to us, therefore we can do what we like to any animal.

Laminations

nacho libre wrote: »

well to be fair it's a good point. a lions eats meat to survive because it has to we don't need to do so.

so if you are of the view that all animals are deserving of life as we are, then how can you defend killing one, when you have an alternative means of survival, just because you enjoy the taste of meat.

They are two separate arguments. Its like saying that someone who likes a few pints down the pub cannot therefore be against drugs being legalised.
One is a sport for fun, another is an industry for nutrition. And it becomes debatable when you argue that a meat free diet, or vegan diet as an extreme is as healthy as a balanced omnivorous diet.

Laminations

nacho libre wrote: »

is that because you like dogs and would see doing so as cruel? you might not care, but others who are dog lovers and also hunt would.
my point is why sentimentalize one animal over another, if hunting is justified on the grounds that animals are inferior to us, therefore we can do what we like to any animal.

Even if one holds the view that animals are inferior to us it does not follow on that we should be allowed to do 'anything' to them.

irishh_bob

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

They did give a good reason, its not as exciting and not as fun.

And as for it being cruel, give me a break. Slaughterhouses are far more "cruel" to animals, are you going to ban those as well?

have you ever been to a ( meat factory ) slaughterhouse ??

BlaasForRafa

irishh_bob wrote: »

have you ever been to a ( meat factory ) slaughterhouse ??

Indeed I have, I lost the taste for having beef for a long time afterwards.

BlaasForRafa

Laminations wrote: »

But you would chase a defenseless animal, possibly to death, just for sh!ts and giggles. Yeah you are of far more decent character.

I've never hunted in my life and have no intention of doing so. However I do know people who hunt and are involved in point-to-point racing and they are decent people and actually I would say they care for animals more (and more animals) than the typical beardy lefty vegan who seem to make up the animal lib ranks.

irishh_bob

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Have you ever been in a slaughterhouse? Cattle do not "go gently into that good night" as it were.

We kill many many times more animals for food than hunters will ever kill, yet because something is for fun then is wrong, hmmm

ive been to ( slaughterhouse) meat factories on many occasions , the cattle are blissfully unaware what is happening untill they are dead as a dodo and while they are herded into fenced areas , that is no different than a normal health check on a farm , they are shot in the head with what looks like a man with a large pen , he litterally presses a button and they are gone , thier is no cruelty whatsoever , give me that ending anyday to wasting away with cancer or some other disease

ps , im no fan of hunting

Bob_Harris

To be honest the type of horse smelling, horse-box dragging pompous gob****es that attend hunts annoy me more than the hunt itself. Twats.

nacho libre

Laminations wrote: »

They are two separate arguments. Its like saying that someone who likes a few pints down the pub cannot therefore be against drugs being legalised.
One is a sport for fun, another is an industry for nutrition. And it becomes debatable when you argue that a meat free diet, or vegan diet as an extreme is as healthy as a balanced omnivorous diet.

in the example you give i'd say that person is a hypocrite for having such a stance. however, that's for another debate. while it may or may not be as healthy to have a diet excluding meat, we can survive without meat, so the key point is; unlike animals we have an alternative to killing animals for food yet we kill them because we enjoy the taste of meat.
if you view an animal as worthy of rights, and given what we have to come to learn about animal's cognitive abilities in the last fifty years, i find the defense of killing animals for food yet condemning the killing of animals for fun as deeply hypocritical, because in both instances we are viewing the animals as expendable to us.

nacho libre

Laminations wrote: »

Even if one holds the view that animals are inferior to us it does not follow on that we should be allowed to do 'anything' to them.

well, by 'anything' i mean killing or inflicting suffering on the animal. So presumably many people who likes to hunt would not agree with the above statement.

sesna

fontanalis wrote: »

If these muppets get started with hunting the next thing will be fishing.

After that it will be plants, and then we'll be forced to get out nutrients from some synthetic brown liquid made in a lab by those fanatical freaks.