Quote:
Originally posted by SCJason
Punk world......Do really think that animals in the US can just live as they were 100 years ago ? It takes a certain amount of natural habitat to sustain each animal. We have taken the habitat to build houses and businesses. It is gone. Why do you think the numbers have dwindled ? Do you have any idea what kind catastrophic death in wildlife we would have if the Fish and Game stopped feeding the herds during the harsh winters ? Where would the migrating water fowl stop to rest and feed on there journey south, if we did not preserve wetlands ? You are arguing my points, for that I am grateful. I am not arguing the need for the protection of animals and habitat. What I am saying is that these people do nothing to help the cause. I am totally down for repairing the damage caused by people being people. That is why I donate to organiztions like the Ducks Unlimited and The Rocky Mountain Elks foundation. These people fight to preserve nature and its animals. As far as your "If you aren't perfect, it is wrong to try and change the world for the better". statement. That is what you do not understand about these groups. You seem to have lost focus. This is debate on whether these groups are worth a shit or not. Not whether we should protect our resoucres. You are describing the very core of there ideology. It is an all or nothing attitude. When you side with the fanatics you must walk the walk, TO THE LETTER, those are there rules.
|
You seem to be missing some points. First of all, nobody says animals should live like they did 100 years ago. Things change, there is nothing you can do against that. But how does that make it good to kill animals?
Nobody says preserving wetlands isn't good either. However, does that mean you can't try and change the world for the better in other ways as well?
Also, where did those "rules" suddenly come from? Especially since they go directly against the rules of argumentation.
By the logic of your rules, someone who's against violence is not allowed to kick the crap out of someone who punches him in the face.
These groups have a significant influence on society, and because of that they are worth quite a bit more than a shit.
(btw, I am not an environmentalist at all. I like large steaks, wear leather boots, have a leather coat, like things like fishing and hunting and am sitting on a wooden chair. It's not that I agree with the PETA, it's that I find the arguments being tossed around in here rather bad. There are some good arguments that can be used against environmentalist groups, none of which have yet been used in this thread)