Because you live in the United States, the social contract that 300 million of us are a part of says that everyone gets a vote about is or is not acceptable practice. I think defend is an overstep, I think it’s important for any group that is a minority of the population, we are less than 10% it’s in our best interest to help others understand our lifestyle, so they can make an informed decision when other minority groups, like PETA, propose legislation. We don’t need everyone to hunt to be ok with the fact that we want to hunt. In today’s pluralistic society I think it’s easier than ever for people to realize that multiple ways of life and exist and should be allowed to.
Where at
@88man I think is missing the boat is that PETA (which I will uses as a catch all for all anti hunters) does not represent the beliefs of Democrats, Big D, ie, the party, rather they are a small interest group that in our two party system caucuses with that Democratic Party. If we had a parliamentary system with 6 parties they would probably caucus with the most far left party. To my knowledge the Democrats have never been opposed to hunting, guns are a separate issue and yes the party has opposed certain types of firearm ownership. I’m sorry but we’re you all unable to hunt between 1994 and 2004? Guns<> hunting. Similarly the Republican Party has not gone after hunting although they are anti public lands, it’s literally a plank in the national party platform, but it’s not anti hunting.
The point is most people are moderate, hunters goal should just be to demonstrate that our lifestyle has a place in our society going forward. Both major political parties have positions on issues that negatively impact hunters. This doesn’t not mean that someone who votes for either party is anti hunting. Bucketing people into one of two groups simply because they caucus with one party over another does a disservice to everyone.
Pretty please stop watching Fox, CNN, and MSNBC. Stick with NBC,CBS, NPR, the BBC, the Christian Science Monitor or the AP.