Debate Rounds (3)
I happened to see another debate on hunting when looking through the challenge page, so I decided, I'd make one. To clarify, when I say hunting, I don't mean poaching. I mean legally going out and harvesting an animal.
Round 1 will be an argument round, so accept and post. Thank you to whoever accepts and good luck.
My first argument is that hunting is a way to keep the animal population at balance. The DNR (Department of Natural Resources) controls hunting seasons. They observe the amount of harvests each season, and monitor the population of animal species that are hunted each year. If the population drops low enough to pose a threat, the DNR will lower the hunting limit, or close the season for a couple of years for restoration. Hunting is a controlled, monitored, and environmentally healthy activity.
Life is a precious thing. You should never ever kill some other living thing just so you can live. I understand that you need food to live, but you seriously need to look at it this way. If you were an animal, and there was this.... other living thing with this scary weapon that you saw slay your family/friends, would you give your life just to get somebody else to live? Soon, there is going to be a more dominant animal, stronger than humans, humans in an evolved form hunting the humans for food. Because the human population is growing, it will lead to more and more deaths of animals.
Being that I believe we were intelligently designed, and didn't come from a retarded-fish-monkey (retarded, because intelligence would have "evolved" into the mind, and fish-monkey, well you know). I do agree that life is a precious thing. From your bring up of killing animals, and taking their lives being a bad thing, I'd assume you are a vegan. And since you brought up humans evolving into higher beings, I will assume you are an atheist. So, atheists don't believe in souls. They believe that we are organic machines, and our conscious is an illusion. That should mean that all living organisms would therefore have the same "feelings". If killing an animal were to be saddening to itself, and other animals around it, wouldn't killing a plant have the same effect, or therefore all cells that are killed when different things are proccessed like wood, or wool, or leather? Wouldn't that plant be sad that it is dieing? Would the cells and the cells that had produced them be sad when they die? I don't think that animals have souls, because in the Bible, (yes, a Bible reference, but you don't have to take points away because I mention the Bible) it says "Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.'" (Genesis 1:26)
For the next round, I would appreciate if you rebutted my argument, as I did here and posted your next argument.
Hunting is good, because these days, meat prices are high. Hunting is an expensive hobby to start depending on the animal you're after, but you can hunt squirrel and rabbits, without having to pay a lot of money. All you need is a 22. rifle, which costs $100-$200 for a good one, camoflauge clothes, a place to hunt, and a small game license $20 at most. It may sound expensive, but after getting a few kills, you see the money starts to come back, if you compare it to the amount of money you would pay for meat that way. Also you can treat the hides and sell them at gun shows to get money back.
DonutPieFace forfeited this round.
DonutPieFace forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.