Council Member
Posts: 1,836 
Location: china
Location: china
March 17th, 2007, 07:47 AM
It is odd that we have so little relationship with nature, with the insects and the leaping frog and the owl that hoots among the hills calling for its mate. We never seem to have a feeling for all living things on the earth. If we could establish a deep abiding relationship with nature we would never kill an animal for our appetite, we would never harm, vivisect, a monkey, a dog, a guinea pig for our benefit. We would find other ways to heal our wounds, heal our bodies. But the healing of the mind is something totally different. That healing gradually takes place if you are with nature, with that orange on the tree, and the blade of grass that pushes through the cement, and the hills covered, hidden, by the clouds.This is not sentiment or romantic imagination but a reality of a relationship with everything that lives and moves on the earth. Man has killed millions of whales and is still killing them. All that we derive from their slaughter can be had through other means. But apparently man loves to kill things, the fleeting deer, the marvellous gazelle and the great elephant. We love to kill each other. This killing of other human beings has never stopped throughout the history of man’s life on this earth. If we could, and we must, establish a deep long abiding relationship with nature, with the actual trees, the bushes, the flowers, the grass and the fast moving clouds, then we would never slaughter another human being for any reason whatsoever. Organized murder is war, and though we demonstrate against a particular war, the nuclear, or any other kind of war, we have never demonstrated against war. We have never said that to kill another human being is the greatest sin or earth. Why would anyone kill ???
It is odd that we have so little relationship with nature, with the insects and the leaping frog and the owl that hoots among the hills calling for its mate. We never seem to have a feeling for all living things on the earth. If we could establish a deep abiding relationship with nature we would never kill an animal for our appetite, we would never harm, vivisect, a monkey, a dog, a guinea pig for our benefit. We would find other ways to heal our wounds, heal our bodies. But the healing of the mind is something totally different. That healing gradually takes place if you are with nature, with that orange on the tree, and the blade of grass that pushes through the cement, and the hills covered, hidden, by the clouds.This is not sentiment or romantic imagination but a reality of a relationship with everything that lives and moves on the earth. Man has killed millions of whales and is still killing them. All that we derive from their slaughter can be had through other means. But apparently man loves to kill things, the fleeting deer, the marvellous gazelle and the great elephant. We love to kill each other. This killing of other human beings has never stopped throughout the history of man’s life on this earth. If we could, and we must, establish a deep long abiding relationship with nature, with the actual trees, the bushes, the flowers, the grass and the fast moving clouds, then we would never slaughter another human being for any reason whatsoever. Organized murder is war, and though we demonstrate against a particular war, the nuclear, or any other kind of war, we have never demonstrated against war. We have never said that to kill another human being is the greatest sin or earth. Why would anyone kill ???
March 17th, 2007, 08:06 AM
Caution, this post contains graphic images
To survive.
[quote]Would you kill???]
Yes, people or animals, whatever the situation dictated.
To address the rest of your post...
I was raised with a infinate knowledge of nature, I forgot it for a time, but like riding a bike, it was not hard to get it back.
I hunt, fish and gather wild food stuffs all the time, it is a part of my traditions and my way of life. If I could, I would live as my ancestors did, off the land.
Hunting for wild game, when done in time honoured traditional ways, is not an afront to nature, it is to commune with it on a deeper level. To hunt for sport is another matter.
I can not for the life of me express in words what I feel as I have ended the life of an animal, I have looked into their eyes as their heart slowly stops, I have been awash in their blood.
This is not cruelty, this is the transfer of ones energy to another, to sustain life. The animal has died at my hands so that I may live.
To this I give thanx, I understand the sacrifice and I respect the animal and its spirit for its gifts, that I have been fortunate to recieve.
What you see as a seperation of nature and man, is your percetion of society, a group I would say I am a fringe member of. I see myself walking hand in hand as best I can with nature and I utilize what she has given me to the best of my ablities.
As for war, survival of the fittest, that is the corner stone of nature.
Caution, this post contains graphic images
Quoting china
To answer your questions directly...
Why would anyone kill ???
To survive.
[quote]Would you kill???]
Yes, people or animals, whatever the situation dictated.
To address the rest of your post...
I was raised with a infinate knowledge of nature, I forgot it for a time, but like riding a bike, it was not hard to get it back.
I hunt, fish and gather wild food stuffs all the time, it is a part of my traditions and my way of life. If I could, I would live as my ancestors did, off the land.
Hunting for wild game, when done in time honoured traditional ways, is not an afront to nature, it is to commune with it on a deeper level. To hunt for sport is another matter.
I can not for the life of me express in words what I feel as I have ended the life of an animal, I have looked into their eyes as their heart slowly stops, I have been awash in their blood.
This is not cruelty, this is the transfer of ones energy to another, to sustain life. The animal has died at my hands so that I may live.
To this I give thanx, I understand the sacrifice and I respect the animal and its spirit for its gifts, that I have been fortunate to recieve.
What you see as a seperation of nature and man, is your percetion of society, a group I would say I am a fringe member of. I see myself walking hand in hand as best I can with nature and I utilize what she has given me to the best of my ablities.
As for war, survival of the fittest, that is the corner stone of nature.
Senate Member
Posts: 6,500 
March 17th, 2007, 08:46 AM
Yes I think were the circumstances all in place I would.....
Having written that, it has been one of my many failings in life knowing that I might be capable of killing another - another animal I think not - but another human? Perhaps - only under the most extreme of conditions.
Then my life itself would be over - I do not believe in taking another's life -
Yes I think were the circumstances all in place I would.....
Having written that, it has been one of my many failings in life knowing that I might be capable of killing another - another animal I think not - but another human? Perhaps - only under the most extreme of conditions.
Then my life itself would be over - I do not believe in taking another's life -
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 3,154
March 17th, 2007, 08:52 AM
Bear, interesting stuff. I've often wondered within that sensibility, if there's room for other hunters and their needs. Is it wrong that a bear or mountain lion should kill a man for sustenance? Is it wrong that we should hunt such an animal down because it insists on doing what we do?
Bear, interesting stuff. I've often wondered within that sensibility, if there's room for other hunters and their needs. Is it wrong that a bear or mountain lion should kill a man for sustenance? Is it wrong that we should hunt such an animal down because it insists on doing what we do?
March 17th, 2007, 08:57 AM
Don't mistake me for some hot headed gun totin' redneck. My understanding of nature and her needs is quite a bit more well heeled then that of the average kneejerked reactionary.
Humans encroachment on the Great Mother will undoubtably result in such accidents, it is not the fault of the animal or the Mother. It is mans mistakes.
Quoting tamarin
Nope.
Is it wrong that a bear or mountain lion should kill a man for sustenance?
Quote:
Yep.
Is it wrong that we should hunt such an animal down because it insists on doing what we do?
Don't mistake me for some hot headed gun totin' redneck. My understanding of nature and her needs is quite a bit more well heeled then that of the average kneejerked reactionary.
Humans encroachment on the Great Mother will undoubtably result in such accidents, it is not the fault of the animal or the Mother. It is mans mistakes.
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 3,154
March 17th, 2007, 09:02 AM
Interesting answers! It is a strange world we live in. I have yet to read of a case of a wild animal hunting a man where the animal doesn't face an instant death sentence from the insensed and well organized human community. It's always struck me as a little weird and hypocritical that we can hunt them but they can't hunt us.
Interesting answers! It is a strange world we live in. I have yet to read of a case of a wild animal hunting a man where the animal doesn't face an instant death sentence from the insensed and well organized human community. It's always struck me as a little weird and hypocritical that we can hunt them but they can't hunt us.
March 17th, 2007, 09:03 AM
Bears
Wolves
Cougars
Linx
All animals I have great respect for and no need to hunt. The rest, I have a great respect for, but find them tasty and useful.
Quoting tamarin
You're talking to an ex Soldier here, I get off on hunting what can hunt back. Though, I do not hunt predatory animals, people suffice nicely. Paintball games are a decent substitute.
Interesting answers! It is a strange world we live in. I have yet to read of a case of a wild animal hunting a man where the animal doesn't face an instant death sentence from the insensed and well organized human community. It's always struck me as a little weird and hypocritical that we can hunt them but they can't hunt us.
Bears
Wolves
Cougars
Linx
All animals I have great respect for and no need to hunt. The rest, I have a great respect for, but find them tasty and useful.
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 3,154
March 17th, 2007, 09:09 AM
I've never played Paintball. As a kid we had some wild battles in the woods though. Apple fights in August were de rigueur. I had a mean right hand. Those were great days. A gang of kids from an adjoining neighbourhood would meet us there and it was a tumultuous afternoon of fun. And near misses and bruises.
I've never played Paintball. As a kid we had some wild battles in the woods though. Apple fights in August were de rigueur. I had a mean right hand. Those were great days. A gang of kids from an adjoining neighbourhood would meet us there and it was a tumultuous afternoon of fun. And near misses and bruises.
Council Member
Posts: 1,836
Location: china
Location: china
March 17th, 2007, 10:36 AM
CDNBear
When you talk about killing, what do you mean by it? It is really quite an interesting question, if you go into it deeply, to inquire whether a human being, living in this world, can totally cease to be violent. Societies, religious communities, have tried not to kill animals. Some have even said, "If you don't want to kill animals, what about the vegetables?" You can carry it to such an extent that you would cease to exist. Where do you draw the line? Is there an arbitrary line according to your ideal, to your fancy, to your norm, to your temperament, to your conditioning, and you say, "I'll go up to there but not beyond"? Is there a difference between individual anger, with violent action on the part of the individual, and the organized hatred of a society which breeds and builds up an army to destroy another society? Where, at what level, and what fragment of violence are you discussing, or do you want to discuss whether man can be free of total violence, not a particular fragment which he calls violence? We know what violence is without expressing in words, in phrases, in action. As a human being in whom the animal is still very strong, in spite of centuries of so-called civilization, where shall I begin? Shall I begin at the periphery, which is society, or at the center, which is myself? You tell me not to be violent, because it is ugly. You explain to me all the reasons, and I see that violence is a terrible thing in human beings, outwardly and inwardly. Is it possible to end this violence?"
PS ..I respect You CDNBear
CDNBear
When you talk about killing, what do you mean by it? It is really quite an interesting question, if you go into it deeply, to inquire whether a human being, living in this world, can totally cease to be violent. Societies, religious communities, have tried not to kill animals. Some have even said, "If you don't want to kill animals, what about the vegetables?" You can carry it to such an extent that you would cease to exist. Where do you draw the line? Is there an arbitrary line according to your ideal, to your fancy, to your norm, to your temperament, to your conditioning, and you say, "I'll go up to there but not beyond"? Is there a difference between individual anger, with violent action on the part of the individual, and the organized hatred of a society which breeds and builds up an army to destroy another society? Where, at what level, and what fragment of violence are you discussing, or do you want to discuss whether man can be free of total violence, not a particular fragment which he calls violence? We know what violence is without expressing in words, in phrases, in action. As a human being in whom the animal is still very strong, in spite of centuries of so-called civilization, where shall I begin? Shall I begin at the periphery, which is society, or at the center, which is myself? You tell me not to be violent, because it is ugly. You explain to me all the reasons, and I see that violence is a terrible thing in human beings, outwardly and inwardly. Is it possible to end this violence?"
PS ..I respect You CDNBear
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Posts: 6,543
Videos: 5
Location: Newfoundland!
Videos: 5
Location: Newfoundland!
March 17th, 2007, 10:41 AM
Personally I would kill and have killed animals for my appetite and of course I have them killed by proxy for meat ever time i eat it.
I would never kill a human though.
Quoting china
I think this is erroneous. Nature is bloody and killing is part of nature.
If we could establish a deep abiding relationship with nature we would never kill an animal for our appetite,
Personally I would kill and have killed animals for my appetite and of course I have them killed by proxy for meat ever time i eat it.
I would never kill a human though.
Senate Member
Posts: 6,500
March 17th, 2007, 10:46 AM
This is developing....... good one China especially your query to Bear
My confession of killing belongs in an entirely different compartment which I rarely open and inspect as part of myself - but it is there regardless of my neglect or pretending it does not exist.
I would not kill to eat. There are plenty of digestible products for eating to sustain life.
I would not kill for revenge. That is not a "win" kill ever.
I would kill in anger but a specific anger and my anger would extend into killing another if necessary.
If someone's life was threatened in my presence I could defend that person, who for some reason - age, infirmity, disease, or injury was unable to protect him or herself, especially children,
I would kill to protect if I felt I could successfully accomplish it without further damage to the other.
Still: I would not want to live if I killed another. Even for that reason.
This is developing....... good one China especially your query to Bear
My confession of killing belongs in an entirely different compartment which I rarely open and inspect as part of myself - but it is there regardless of my neglect or pretending it does not exist.
I would not kill to eat. There are plenty of digestible products for eating to sustain life.
I would not kill for revenge. That is not a "win" kill ever.
I would kill in anger but a specific anger and my anger would extend into killing another if necessary.
If someone's life was threatened in my presence I could defend that person, who for some reason - age, infirmity, disease, or injury was unable to protect him or herself, especially children,
I would kill to protect if I felt I could successfully accomplish it without further damage to the other.
Still: I would not want to live if I killed another. Even for that reason.
