1). Although I am personally opposed to the practice, I do not want to impose my moral values upon others. So if someone else wants to hunt lions, then who am I to judge? My motto is: If you don’t like lion killing, then don’t kill one.
2). It’s clear that laws against lion hunting won’t stop lion hunting. It will only make lion hunting dangerous for the hunters because banning lion hunting will drive hunters into back jungles to seek unsafe hunting. We do not want to return to “back alley” hunting.
3). Anti-choicers sit atop their moral pedestals and dictate that others shouldn’t have safe and affordable access to lion hunting, proving they only care about lions and not the hunters.
4). What’s the harm? Lions are only blobs of tissue, cells, muscles, and skin. It’s just like killing a cockroach.
5). Lion hunting should be “safe, legal, and rare.” But in those cases when a lion is killed, just think of all the good things that come from its death. Just think of all the research that could be done with the lion’s harvested organs. Anti-choicers only care about lions, not the countless people who could benefit from the stem-cell research done on the harvested lion’s organs.
6). Most people who are against lion hunting are not hunters, and therefore, should have no say in this debate. If you’ve never been faced with a fierce lion before, you have no right to an opinion in this matter.
7). Allowing hunters safe and affordable access to lions liberates and empowers the hunters. For far too long they have been oppressed and I will not sit quietly while hunterphobes try turning the clock on hunting rights back a hundred years.
8). Tax dollars should be used to fund poor lion hunters so they have the same access to lion hunting as the rich.
9). Lion hunting is simply the playing out of the survival of the fittest. Darwin would be proud. Who are we to interfere?
10). Unless anti-choicers are willing to adopt every lion in the world, then they have no right to tell others that they can’t hunt them.
It’s fine if you are opposed to what [Walter] Palmer did, but that doesn’t excuse you from the duty to be sane and rational. It’s a lion, after all. An animal. If you want to be really agitated by a doctor who kills living things, you should probably be less focused on this dentist and a little more focused on abortionists like LeRoy Carhart, who murder actual people. Carhart has killed both unborn and born humans, and likes to do the former by ripping the child apart while it’s still alive. Maybe the media should be camping out in front of his house instead of Palmer’s. Maybe we should be asking why doctors are allowed to execute babies, not why dentists are allowed to hunt African game.
This dichotomy has become, perhaps, the most bewildering and confusing thing about our culture. Progressives actively celebrate the most depraved evils, and then make super villains out of folks who hunt, or fly Confederate flags, or refuse to bake gay wedding cakes. It’s like they’re standing on a street corner simultaneously applauding a thug as he murders a man for his wallet, and calling for a summary execution of a pedestrian who forgot to use the crosswalk. This isn’t just a matter of misplaced priorities; this is unadulterated lunacy.
– Matt Walsh
Read the entire article here.
“Through natural learning children learn critical thinking, social skills, bonding with friends and family, and develop a genuine interest in knowledge. In structured, rigid schooling, especially the forced government variety, children learn conformity, compliance, memorization, the importance of following arbitrary rules, and to blindly respect those in positions of ‘authority,’ whether they deserve it or not. . . . And if children aren’t perfectly conforming to the rigid idea of what is ‘normal’ behavior, if they express themselves, and stand out – then these children are slapped with various diagnoses, then drugged into compliance.”
From the article The Absurdity of Public Education.
HT: Country Blossom