Playing with fire

Fox hunting, hare coursing, seal culling and bull fighting. A range of trendily unpopular pastimes which I actually don’t have a huge problem with. And before you stop reading in simulated and dramatic disgust, if you eat meat, if you wear leather – in fact, unless you’re a total  and absolute vegan – then you’re being hypocritical in wanting any bloodsport banned. Animals live, animals die.
I’m not saying that watching a greyhound taking down a hare is particularly pleasant to see. It certainly doesn’t ring my bell.
But if you find that equally unappealing, then you shouldn’t enjoy your bacon sandwich just because the chop chop squeal squeal goes on behind closed doors.

And just occasionally, nature gets one back – it might just be the bovine equivalent of a 90th minute goal when you’re already 5-0 down – but it’s still one back.

That same hypocrisy is running through the ranks of the greenies who are aghast at the extent of the damage caused by the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico. Again, an environmental disaster is not something I want to see – who does? – but unless those whining greenies are 100% self-sufficient, then they rely in some way on oil. So while their complaints that BP should (could?) have done more to prevent this from happening may be justified to some extent, their insistence that we should boycott BP because of the Deepwater Horizon incident is frankly laughable.

This could have happened to any oil company, anywhere in the world, at any time. Any company producing oil for everyone on the planet.
While watching Sky News earlier, the irony of the video taken from the Greenpeace plane flying over “Ground Zero” as they called it, wasn’t lost on me. While the commentary lamented (in a hugely annoying voice) that big business was ruining our oceans with its constant thirst for oil, I was left wondering if the plane they were in was powered by. Fresh air? Fairy dust? Or some fraction of the crude oil that was spilling out of the seabed below them? I wonder.

You’ve used more aircraft fuel than I have this year, Greenpeace, so stop trying to lecture me on the moral rights and wrongs of my drive to work. Bugger off.

Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
And those greenies are full of shit.

9 thoughts on “Playing with fire

  1. Next you’ll be telling us how the free-range/organic farming hysteria actually results in their being less food available overall, and mostly how it just lets rich people, who already have food, buy food with conscience-assuaging labels.

  2. To argue that, “unless you’re a total and absolute vegan”, is fair, but also convenient because it removes self responsibility and encourages apathy. “Ah well, I eat meat and wear leather, so I might as well torture and kill this homeless dog that I found roaming on my lawn. It will be hilarious shoving fireworks up its arse!”

    There is nothing wrong with striving to achieve something.

    It doesn’t have to be one-or-the-other That is just silly purism.
    .-= Jeremy´s last blog ..Apple of my eye =-.

  3. Having said all that, I killed a dove the other day. It was injured so I had the advantage. I picked it up and threw it against the wall.

    Was really funny.
    .-= Jeremy´s last blog ..Apple of my eye =-.

  4. you are completely right.

    that doesn’t mean that big business, or small business, or anybody, should not be held accountable for reckless practices. even if we use their products/services.

    if that ‘i use your product so i have no right to be critical’ excuse was valid, nothing would ever change. i think it is a case of ‘i use your product, and that does give me the right to expect you to act in a responsible manner’.

    it is ‘write everything in quotation marks’ day today. did you know?
    .-= jacki janse van rensburg´s last blog are my hero, brother! =-.

  5. Jacques > I would never say that. I even let my kids go free range in the back garden from time to time.

    Stan > I have no problem with whaling – I don’t want them to go after endangered species and I want it to be managed, but otherwise, I see no issue. Certainly no logical reason to ban it.

    TheNacK > I think it is. Well spotted. Nice.

    Jeremy > The problem with sticking fireworks up the bum of homeless dogs is that the strontium and sulphur makes them taste funny on the braai.
    No – I’m no advocating cruelty to animals. Just that banning ‘sports’ which act out what actually happens in nature or in food production anyway is daft.

    Jacki > I agree in part. But I would challenge Greenpeace to nominate an oil company that IS acting in a repsonsible manner. If they can’t do that, then they shouldn’t be using the products they produce.

  6. “No – I’m no advocating cruelty to animals. Just that banning ’sports’ which act out what actually happens in nature anyway is daft.”

    Animals shove swords into bulls while fellow animals cheer them on inside a stadium?

    I am going to email David Attenborough; he’d love to narrate that.

    Fair is fair, not so? Enter:…
    .-= Jeremy´s last blog ..Apple of my eye =-.

  7. Jeremy > It would be a sight. But I’d already corrected that line!

    “Just that banning ’sports’ which act out what actually happens in nature or in food production anyway is daft.”

    Get Sir Dave to narrate at the local slaughterhouse rather.

    Leave a Reply