The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Hunting is good for the economy and the environment

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
RhysEPC has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/23/2018 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 471 times Debate No: 113062
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)




Hunting is very beneficial for economy and environment. Hunting has created approximately 700,000 new jobs and helps stabilize the animal population, so it doesn"t grow out of control. Hunters pay millions of dollars in taxes for their rifles, ammunition and licenses. Which benefits the economy. That money goes to land conservation and hunting and fishing programmes The Bible says that we are allowed to eat animals on many occasions so why would we stop hunting if God allows it and gives us permission to all things living?

If you except my Debate there is no forfeiting no matter what. Thank you and good luck.


Pro claims that hunters stimulate the economy by buying hunting equipment which is taxed. This is true but the money generated by the sale of such items is more than accounted for by eco-tourism.

Pro also states that hunting controls animal population. But this is a case of offering up a hobby as a solution to a problem that the existence of the hobby contributes to causing in the first place. Animal populations are deliberately increased precisely to accommodate hunting.

Lastly, Pro claims that the Bible permits us to eat animals. In order to use the Bible as an authority, Pro would first have to justify the Bible being placed on such a pedestal, something which a 1000 character limit is not going to permit. Moreover, it is a classic case of reverse engineering. You can find a verse in the Bible to justify any position you already hold. For instance, I could just as easily claim that God considers a perfect world - and by extension, heaven - to be a vegan one (Gen 1:29, 1 Cor 8:8).
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by BezoomnyBratchny 3 years ago

If you are still interested in continuing this debate, I'm happy to accept a new debate on this topic.
Posted by Sonofcharl 3 years ago
I would suggest that without human intervention, the rest of the animal kingdom would be self regulating.
A) We destabilize the food chain by limiting numbers of top predators.
B) The human population increases exponentially, due to the use of medical and surgical techniques. No such opportunities would be available in a human free environment.
Posted by RhysEPC 3 years ago
Sonofcharl It is and is the population of the animals. Sorry let me rephrase that, The animal population would be out of control if we did not hunt.
Posted by Sonofcharl 3 years ago
What about stabilizing the human population?

Isn't it the human population that is growing out of control?
Posted by MagicAintReal 3 years ago
No "madder" what?
Come on!
Posted by Nd2400 3 years ago
One thing to keep in mind hunting animals is good if they not on the endangered list. Hunting animals on this list is illegal.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.