- This topic has 83 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Steve
Fair point…and one of the problems is knowing when to draw the line. How about Rats?
I dostrongly disagree with hunting of genuinely wild birds
But its the nasty chase and ripping apart by a pack which is vile. Back to my point about setting a bulls horns alight…(yes that does happen)
I dont get the point about the Hounds at all…
Clive,
Clear one point up for us.
Which of these do you really believe in:
a) "But its the nasty chase and ripping apart by a pack which is vile, " – the animal cruelty card or <br>b) "And yes, Fox Hunting is a class issue…agreed , " – the anti-classes play.
Let me decide whether I feel you are a New-Labour supporter or merely being misled by those tricky New-Labour spinsters.
The first obviously…
My point was that it is not a class issue in the way most assume it is. The sport (or whatever it is) has survived BECAUSE it was the preserve of the supposed ruling classes
And so you think that you have to be New Labour to oppose hunting? In that case "New Labour" should be receiving 80% of the vote next time around….
Nice figures, well if’s thats what you believe then its up to you and it’s fair game. I suppose you’re happy enough. :)
(Edited by Ken1 at 4:55 pm on Nov. 23, 2004)
"by the way..YOU don’t police me phunter"
I don’t remember saying i did, you have different views to others thats fine by me, why would i want to police you anyway.
The fact that some people, foolishly in my view, seem to regard banning foxhunting as a way to settle class scores should be an irrelevance as far as the central argument is concerned.
Throughout history people have adopted causes, noble and otherwise, for valid and invalid reasons. But it is the cause itself that is the issue.
Foxhunting (rather like the activities of paedophiles) doesn’t affect me directly, other than through horseracing’s continued and unnecessary association with it. But I do feel I have some sort of right to expect to live in a society which is free of this particular brand of barbarism.  ÂÂÂ
(Edited by Prufrock at 6:19 pm on Nov. 23, 2004)
We agree on that, Grasshopper. My last real action as a Labour Party member was to protest about the apparently imminent invasion of Iraq during Blair’s speech at the Labour Party Conference in 2002.
However, if we always ignore the "smaller" things in politics then those smaller things will never be attended to.
Why bother with building new hospitals when the situation in Iraq needs to be sorted out? Why build a new road? Why bother to try sorting out the mess that is gambling legislation?
It is not as if the issue of banning foxhunting has only just come up: it has been with us for decades now, and all too often it has been put on the back burner because it has been seen to be insignificant.
Long overdue, I reckon.<br>
With regards to the effect a ban on foxhunting will have on horseracing, it is also not as if the racing authorities will have been taken unawares.
They have made it known off the record that contingency plans were drawn up several years ago for point-to-points to continue as much as possible in the event of a ban coming to pass. The main reason they didn’t publicise this fact was that they seemed to imagine that it would somehow make a ban more likely to happen.
"since it’s the first time you have ever addressed me on this forum and I know you are a mate of Seagull..or him.. then I assume you will only ever respond in a negative way towards me "
EC i am a mate of Seagulls but we live hundred of miles apart, so i am not him, but i can’t understand why you think i would be negative towards you because we are friends, i only entered into the debate like everyone else has.
Seagull has never mentioned you to me and i didn’t realise you knew him, but i can honestly say that i was just putting my point of view over and that was it.
I am sorry if you are reading something else into it, because that certainly isn’t the case, and i certainly won’t be policing you as you put it to give negative points to your posts.
If i agree with with any posts you make then i will have no hesitation in backing up your point, i really don’t understand why you think i would be negative towards you because i am friends with Seagull though, and he hasn’t posted in this thread.
If you want to PM me i will be happy to discuss why you would think this.
I’d agree with most of the above, except that I’d have legalising toot higher up (if I understand what you mean by "toot" in the first place). :biggrin: :cool:
The "small issue" argument has been used, possibly with justification, for decades, and the result is that nothing has ever been done.
Now that this "small issue" has finally come to a head, after a seeming eternity of procrastination, among those who are after all convinced that it is a big issue are the Lords and supporters of the Countryside Alliance. The former has delayed the parliamentary process against the wishes of the public and its elected representatives. The latter have already been responsible for civil disobedience and by all accounts will step this up hugely upon the Bill becoming law.
They don’t agree with you that it is a small issue, and without their interventions this "small issue" would have been quickly consigned to history some time ago.
I do agree with you that it is a, relatively, small issue. But, rather like a leaky tap that you never get round to fixing because there are more important things to do, I think that it is something that should be sorted out.
Have you any views on the effect the ban will have on horseracing and of the stance taken by some of those in power in horseracing on this matter over the years?
This is, after all, a RACING forum. ;)
Grasshopper
While I agree with you on both this issue and on Iraq, I don’t agree with the notion that the small business of government should be suspended while the destruction of Iraq is in progress.
The fact is, the government isn’t really spending any time on Iraq (except trying to spin their way out of trouble, which doesn’t count as government business in my book) so they might as well take care of smaller tasks.
However, in addressing these tasks, I’d like to see them addressed with fairness and moral consistency, rather than picking on small, voiceless minorities whose activities have no impact on other people.
Personally, I believe that this cheapens us as a country.
However, what do we really expect from a government who are continually trying to create an imaginary link between immigration and organised crime/terrorism?
Steve
Personally, I believe that this cheapens us as a country.
And I agree with you. "This" being the pursuit of a living creature to a cruel death in the name of sport in my case, however.
(PS: when were the followers of the Countryside Alliance "voiceless"? I wish they were, but they clearly are not)
Quote: from Grasshopper on 7:47 pm on Nov. 23, 2004[br]. That leaves everything open, from angling to point-to-point..
<br>eventually,national hunt racing
<br>
Prufrock
You said
I do feel I have some sort of right to expect to live in a society which is free of this particular brand of barbarism.
Imagine I felt the same about meat eating?
Not the same?
No they aren’t.
Firstly, meat is heavily subsidised which takes money out of my pocket via taxes.
Secondly, meat is linked to practically every widespread degenerative disease in this country, placing an unnecessary burden on the NHS, which again means money out of my pocket as taxes as the NHS becomes more costly and could also lead to me not getting treatment I need in time because of longer waiting lists.
Thirdly, it requires overfarming which, if continued, will mean that, by the end of the century, we could be unable to grow food in this country.
[for example, in the last two hundred years, topsoil in the United States has gone from 21 inches to a little over six. It takes 500 years to build a single inch of top soil. That’s 7500 years of erosion in 200 years, 85% of which is directly related to cattle farming]
.. and that’s not even getting into the effects on the water supply or on world hunger.
And fox hunting affects me how?
The fact is, I’ve spent my whole life living in a society which is free of "this particular brand of barbarism".
It’s called the city.
Steve
Grasros
Left on its own, I really wouldn’t give a monkeys about the ban.
However, it sets a precendent of voting away other people’s freedoms based on hypocritical morality and that’s not a good road to go down.
(however, I’ve no doubt that’s the way we’re headed)<br> <br>Steve
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.