Blogger of Jared

39 Responses to “Punching Holes in God’s Canvass”

Reminds me of this story, told by Joseph Smith, from TPJS, p. 71:

In pitching my tent we found three massasaugas or prairie rattlesnakes, which the brethren were about to kill, but I said, “Let them alone — don’t hurt them! How will the serpent ever lose its venom, while the servants of God possess the same disposition, and continue to make war upon it? Men must become harmless before the brute creation, and when men lose their vicious dispositions and cease to destroy the animal race, the lion and the lamb can dwell together, and the sucking child can play with the serpent in safety.” The brethren took the serpents carefully on sticks and carried them across the creek. I exhorted the brethren not to kill a serpent, bird, or an animal of any kind during our journey unless it became necessary in order to preserve ourselves from hunger. (May 26, 1834.) D.H.C. 2:71.

Comment # 1 left by Connor Boyack on September 18th, 2006

What about the part of the Word of Wisdom that says meat is okay in time of cold or of famine? I’m not a hunting advocate. I’ve never shot a gun in my life and the only arrows I’ve ever shot hit a hay barrel. I know a large number of these people aren’t hunting out of need. I would definitely advocate hunting in the case of need and not rejoicing but being thankful.

How do you define need, though? We’ve removed so many natural predators; what are we supposed to do? Let them overbreed and starve to death? Or allow judicious, controlled hunting?

Again, I have no desire for a culture of death. However, I think we have a responsibility and I don’t know any other way to meet it. When I was in college I learned of a program one hunter had started called “Hunters for the Hungry” (or something like that) wherein the animals he hunted were dressed and given to those in need. How would you feel about that kind of program? (Provided the hunters were good stewards and behaved respectfully and thankfully toward their prey (hard to guarantee I know)?

Comment # 2 left by Proud Daughter of Eve on September 18th, 2006

“Centuries ago, sailors on long voyages used to leave a pair of pigs on every deserted island. Or they’d leave a pair of goats. Either way, on any future visit, the island would be a source of meat. These islands, they were pristine. These were home to breeds of birds with no natural predators. Breeds of birds that lived nowhere else on earth. The plants there, without enemies they evolved without thorns or poisons. Without predators and enemies, these islands, they were paradise. The sailors, the next time they visited these islands, the only things still there would be herds of goats or pigs. …. Does this remind you of anything? Maybe the ol’ Adam and Eve story? …. You ever wonder when God’s coming back with a lot of barbecue sauce?” - Chuck Palahniuk

This quote was just for fun.

Peter Singer offers probably the best argument for animal rights and life. He basically argues that if we believe that inflicting pain and suffering on another person is wrong, then it is just as wrong to do the same to others. Appealing to rationality of the human over the animal is problematic because we would still find it immoral to inflict pain on suffering on the most retarded or mentally incapacitated person there is.

Rather than appealing to abstract notion of creation as a canvass (which I actually find aesthetically appealing), hunting is wrong because pain and suffering sucks. We don’t like being in pain, so why inflict it on others.

When meat as food is required for survival (and humans as more rational beings have a better reason to survive), then hunting is more justified (however, is that really the case for most meat-eating people in the nation?).

Hunting is also more moral than factory farming as well because of the level of pain and suffering involved. A deer in the mountains lives a fairly happy deery life, until bang! - dead. A factory farmed cow, chicken, rooster, etc lives the most painful and miserable of lives only to be subjected to a painful, and sometimes long, death. Also, the amount of grain to meat ratio for beef and other meets is amazing high. The more meat we eat, the less food there is in the world and the more suffering of starvation we cease from preventing.

Comment # 3 left by the narrator on September 18th, 2006

PDoE

I’m a little dubious that any latter-day saint in a developed nation needs to hunt for their food.

I am not advocating against the eating of meat or of the entire cattle, sheep, etc… industry. I’m challenging the act of hunting. It’s a ridiculous act. You can feed a whole family on a mere pittance/month if you plan conscientously, clip coupons, etc..

I know this because my wife and I used to spend about 12.00/week on groceries when we were totally hooked on coupons.

As for the hunters for the hungry program, why don’t they stop hunting and just donate food/money to the families?

I don’t advocate the banning of hunting either, to me that is too close to compelled righteousness (besides, poaching would flourish as an underground industry and just make everything worse) I’m saying that the part of mankind that wants to hunt is wicked and carnal.

Comment # 4 left by Ryan on September 18th, 2006

I’m saying that the part of mankind that wants to hunt is wicked and carnal.

That sums it up very pithily when the emphasis is on “want”! I have no doubt many people still “need” to hunt (even many people in the U.S.). But those who thirst for hunting season are thirsting after a carnal lust. It is simply an uncontrovertable fact!

Comment # 5 left by Wade on September 18th, 2006

Hunting is good for the soul.

Comment # 6 left by Fred Bear on September 18th, 2006

Hunting is good for the soul revealing our dark side. (There, fixed that for ya)

Comment # 7 left by Ryan on September 18th, 2006

Hunting is good for the soul.

He who has admin access to view this commenter’s IP and email address knows who the man behind the mask is…

Comment # 8 left by Connor Boyack on September 18th, 2006

I gather most of the posters thus far were raised in the city. Let me offer the perspective of one who was raised hunting, still hunts on occasion, and continues to wrestle with the approach and attitude one must have were it is possible to do so without offending God, and maybe even please God.

I was raised in Central Utah under a long tradition of hunting, so I’ve killed a plenty. We always shot rabbits under the rationale that “they destroy our fields”, which is to an extent true. Most other takes were consumed. Of course we weren’t starving, but we did offset meat that we would have purchased anyway. Between 8 and 16 I shot a lot of “tweety birds”, and by the time I was 17 had decided that the “taking for no purpose” element of my life was truly wicked and I have since made an effort to stay repentant.

The Lord in His wisdom set a stage where many things are both good and bad depending on the framework employed and the heart of the employer. We know that things sexual are smiled upon in some contexts, and the same acts are forbidden in another. Even when allowed and commanded, husband and wife can still mess it up by their attitudes toward sex and each other.

When I have hunted for what I believe are valid purposes - namely pest control, family bonding, skill development, creation appreciation, and yes - providing food so I can apply the savings against another commandment - eliminate my house payment; I still see that it is possible to do so in a “blood thirsty” way, and I know many people who probably have some of that in them. (But I couldn’t vouch for the accuracy of that sentance construction).

“Destroying animals is Creation appreciation?” I can hear some of you saying already. Read on.

It may sound hard to believe, but I have found hunting can be a very spiritual experience. God has said that all of creation, including animals, are for the benefit of men, and he placed us as lords and stewards over creation to decide for ourselves how to use it. When I have an opportunity to hunt it is a chance to ponder what purpose could be advanced by so doing. As lord over the earth, I get to decide what benefits me or my family. If I am prayerful, I believe the Spirit can confirm whether my purpose is in harmony with the Lord’s will.

Do I see a “benefit” in hunting down flies or trap mice in my house? Yes, and so does the Lord. If the rabbits are making it hard for my grandfather to support his needs, can it be claimed righteous to organize the cousins and remove some? Yes, provided that we discuss as a family that the purpose is both family bonding and helping grandpa. Can I help it if some of my cousins haven’t yet pondered the sacred nature of life? No, but I have found that someone who is learning line upon line will eventually humble themselves and “use sparingly”. Similar to many other pursuits, hunting can be every bit the “test and trial” by which we become more righteous or become more wicked.

Consider this from D&C 89
12 Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly;
13 And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.

The interpretation is not necessarily that “hunting is ok, but if you’re more righteous you don’t”. To me that is a Pharasaical interpretation that allows non-hunters to blanket a veil of wickedness across all hunters. I think it is saying both choices can be valid. If we choose to use animals, we should do so with thanksgiving. If we chose not to, he’s got nothing against that either.

Which allows you to experience the soul and intelligence of that which sustains you more? Slapping down $25 so that someone else can kill our Outback Steak?; or learning outdoor skills, walking and sharing stories with your kids, then reverently and cleanly taking sustenance from a creature placed here and told that it has two purposes to its creation - multiply so that it might have joy, and be available in the event one of the sons of Adam or daughters of Eve has a purpose for it, presumably also a source of pride and joy.

While the “natural animal” in the telestial sphere instintively avoids all danger, when out in nature or shopping I often imagine the celestial side of both animals and materials of the earth shouting “take me, take me!” as they see me. I ponder a response, “Not today, I have no needs today.” I imagine inanimate objects are bummed out, but I suppose animals respond, “Whew, I thought he might actually say yes! Then I’d have to live up to my highest commitment to the Lord!”

I don’t know the answers, but I don’t think it’s a slam dunk to blanket that “all hunting, and all hunters, are unjustified when they’re not starving”. Maybe most are, but how can you know? Stereotypes often are more true than not - hence the label - but many individuals don’t conform to the stereotype, so if you want to talk generally about the attitudes of many that’s probably appropriate, but it should be qualified that in a line of 100 active LDS hunters, we may have no idea really the number to whom “the Lord looketh upon the heart” and finds nothing wanting.

Unless you’re all prepared to forego all use of animals (which according to D&C there’s nothing wrong with except perhaps doing so and then self-righteously lecturing the rest of us), then you are all at least vicarious hunters who presumably hunt “sparingly”. But if you enjoy the Brazillian meat shops like I do then you’re not really much more sparing than most hunters. I don’t know that vicarious hunting really puts you on better footing than learning how to put the meat on the plate yourself, and walking that spiritual journey to actually do it and be grateful for the life you witnessed in sacrifice for your own.

Good post - a real thinker!

Mike Brown
www.latterdaylogic.com

Comment # 9 left by Mike B. on September 19th, 2006

Nephi hunted. Enos did. What about all those animal sacrifices the Lord called for?

If God didn’t want us to eat animals he would not have made them out of meat.

Comment # 10 left by Eric Nielson on September 19th, 2006

Oh, and how about fishing? Same thoughts for that? And don’t kill bugs.

Comment # 11 left by Eric Nielson on September 19th, 2006

Re: Nephi and Enos

They hunted out of necessity. That’s the only way they could eat, I don’t recall any scriptures saying “and they rejoiced in the spilling of blood”

Re: Animal Sacrifices

Again, those sacrifices were, theoretically, done with an eye toward God and obeying his commandment. I’m sure many corrupted minds took pleasure in the kill, I like to think that this highly detracted from the purpose and spirit of the sacrifice.

Re: Vicarious Hunting

I absolutely think that simply being a meat consumer or even a rancher/farmer is a higher moral ground. I don’t eat my hamburger and happily imagine how the cow was slaughtered. I would guess that most ranchers don’t get a perverse enjoyment from it either. Those who do, are sinning, in my opinion.

Re: God making animals out of meat.

I agree entirely. I loves me some Hamburgers… I don’t, however, rejoice in the kill.

Re: Fishing

Yes, fishing for sport is also part of a wicked desire to capture and kill for pleasure (”Oh but Ryan, I catch and release”… Yes I am sure that the fish can appreciate you snagging a barbed hook through the roof of their mouth, dragging them onto a boat, yanking the hook out and then carefully and delicately sliding them back into the water. No harm done right? Please. )

Re: Bugs

Same principle.. just because they have don’t have cute brown eyes doesn’t mean we should gleefully take our magnifying glass and fry ants or pull the wings off butterflys. I think you missed my and PDoE’s point that oftentimes we have to kill that which we are stewards over (bugs transmit diseases and infiltrate our homes. ) to maintain a balance. This doesn’t mean we should enjoy it.

Re: Being raised in the city

I could have been raised on Mars that doesn’t make my argument any less valid.

Mike B. I thik it’s awesome that you take your family out into nature and teach them to appreciate the earth, but you lost me at “reverently and cleanly taking sustenance”. Hunting is anything but reverent (if it were we would all shoot off blanks from our six-guns in the chapel after a beautiful musical number) It’s bloody, violent, cruel and preemptive

I have a better idea, when your family has an inclination to kill an animal, ask them why they desire to kill it and teach a lesson about the sanctity of all life. Enjoy the moment when you can simply appreciate the majesty of a buck, the silliness of a squirrel or rabbit, the mechanical marvel of a bird in flight, etc…

Or you can teach them what the past prophets (including Connor’s earlier quote) had to say on the subject, the quotes are plentiful and easy to find.

Comment # 12 left by Ryan on September 19th, 2006

Mike, you promote hunting for “family bonding” and “skill development”? That sounds absurd.

“Honey, grab the kids! We’re going to spend the night growing closer by killing an animal and watching it spasm during its last few seconds of life!”

And skill development? Not being married, I could argue that I want to further my sexual skill development and have premarital sex. I could justify gambling as “skill development”. There are a plethora of other unexcusable things I could do under the guise of “skill development”.

And yes, I was one of the ones thinking “destroying animals is creation appreciation?” when I read that. Such can only be the case when the animal is absolutely needed for food. When it is done out of lust, sport, “skill development”, “family bonding”, or whatever reason other than the sustaining of one’s own life, then it is quite the opposite of creation appreciation. Indeed, such an appreciation would require honoring and sustaining the creature’s life.

Comment # 13 left by Connor Boyack on September 19th, 2006

Most of you don’t understand hunting…

and it’s not for everyone. A lot of your hunters are also your biggest conservationists. In my circles of friends and family hunting or fishing (indiscriminate killing to some of you yankees) the joy is in the trip. I have killed animals on a hunting trip before, sometimes I came home empty handed, always I came home with a greater appreciation of Heavenly Fathers creation.
Is it necessary now? That depends on your point of view. With the decline of natural predators and hunting for survival, many states can at times be literally overrun with deer. One example would be Alabama. Striking when you realize that in the eary 1900s there were less than 10,000 deer in that state and now the population is over 1,000,000 (estimated) Darn hunters.
IV. Herd Management

Deer herds are managed primarily by selective removal through hunting. Unlike other game animals in Alabama, deer have few natural predators to keep populations in check. Sport hunting takes the place of natural predators.

If unhunted or lightly hunted, deer increase rapidly until their numbers exceed available food supplies. As this occurs, preferred foods are eliminated, herd productivity is reduced, and the health and size of the animals begin to decline.

Continued population increases often cause long-term habitat destruction. The incidence of disease and parasites increases. Ultimately, natural mortality rises and, occasionally, widespread die-offs occur.

Once a deer population reaches the carrying capacity of the habitat, the growth must be stabilized. About 35 percent of a deer population must be removed annually to stabilize the population. Intensive buck-only hunting rarely removes more than 10 to 15 percent of a population. Removing significant numbers of antlerless deer (does) is necessary to keep a deer herd from becoming overpopulated.
(www.aces.edu)

When you also consider the amount of money generated by the states from hunting and fishing liceses and tags, well sometimes you’re talking about a significant portion of their budget. If it is wrong are you willing to help make up the difference?

Those of us who for years have been warned to have a YEAR SUPPLY of food storage, well someday a hunter may be your family’s best friend. All of us owe thanks to a hunter for us being here today.

Whats really disturbing me here lately is the seemingly obnoxious ways some have expressing their opinions. Humor to be sure, but some comments are getting ruthless… -

Comment # 14 left by Okie on September 19th, 2006

Okie,

Yes perhaps my language has been too strong although, I certainly am not interested in portraying the idea that this is a minor issue. I think it’s huge especially because hunting seems to be an extremely popular hobby among many of the US saints.

“Most of you don’t understand hunting”

You are absolutely right. I don’t understand it. I don’t understand why killing is fun.

the joy is in the trip

Actions speak louder than words, and it’s obvious that the real joy is in the kill. Otherwise hunters would simply go camping and maybe try and track down some animal… look at them and go home. Camraderie based upon a mutual appreciation of taking life is pretty ruthless.

Herd Management There are too many counters to your arguments to list here which are thoroughly catalogued by groups opposed to hunting (a simple google search will provide ample information). In the end, whetever the benefits of hunting, they still do not justify a personal thirst for blood. I have yet to meet a hunter who only hunts because he/she is a whitetail deer activist. Such a hunter would mourn the need to kill and would be actively looking for alternative solutions (such as promising new sterilization efforts) to help save the deer. Why not donate all the money you spend on hunting gear to these new initiatives, this would truly be conservationism.

If it is wrong are you willing to help make up the difference?

Absolutely. Why would I support filling government coffers with funds from something I believe is immoral. Besides, most of that money goes back into funding conservationism that allows for more hunting. Sort of a vicious cycle.

well someday a hunter may be your family’s best friend And in a natural disaster I might wish I knew how to hotwire an abandoned car but that doesn’t mean I support auto theft.

Comment # 15 left by Ryan on September 19th, 2006

And in a natural disaster I might wish I knew how to hotwire an abandoned car but that doesn’t mean I support auto theft.

Oh man, that one takes the cake… awesome.

Comment # 16 left by Connor Boyack on September 19th, 2006

okie,

i agree with you that hunting in some instances is necessary to protect nature. killing is a part of nature and human interactions that have reduced the threats to some animals requires us to add a threat to maintain a natural equilibrium. an analogy could be the use of controlled fires and brush burns to protect a forest from devastation. our protection of forests from fires has created forests with too much underbrush that would turn a natural threatless fire into a unnatural forest-threatening disaster.

that is why i argue that eating factory-farmed animals is far more immoral than hunting.

Comment # 17 left by the narrator on September 19th, 2006

Ryan:

First of all my arguments came from a united college educational organization who provide statistics, not someone with an agenda. From my experiences of hunting and hunting trips the joy is the trip. Year after year someone (sometimes many someone’s in my family come home with nothing. Some of my favorite memories on those trips, memories I cherish, have nothing to do with the killing of an animal. As far as meeting an “Activist for the Betterment of White Tail Deer” you need to get out more. I know men who rarely shoot at anything or care to. I know men who do a considerable amount to improve their environment. I know men who put food out for deer during harsh winters, and not just so they can ambush them later. There are those who use hunting as an excuse to drink and blast away at an animal, but most of the guys I know are outdoorsman. They enjoy doing something they love that happens to sometimes end with the death of an animal.
“And in a natural disaster I might wish I knew how to hotwire an abandoned car but that doesn’t mean I support auto theft.”
This I thought was way beneath your talents. See I would support auto repair so a mechanic could show me how to hot wire a car. Not compare something completely legal to something that’s not.
“Such a hunter would mourn the need to kill and would be actively looking for alternative solutions”
Does this mean that every time you go out to eat with your family to a burger joint or steak house across town, that the journey there is a miserable, drab bother? That the atmosphere of the table causes you physical pain and has no enjoyment factor at all? We all know the dinner ends in some consumption of an innocent animal in some form.
Maybe you’re a vegan. Yeah, that’s it. I hope you wear synthetic leather shoes, you don’t eat meat and that none of the daily products you use were tested on animals. I would hate to think that someone who disdains senseless killing in the face of so many alternatives both online and locally would stoop to include the immoral acts of what others find as fun and enjoyable as a way of life. That might make you a hypocrite.
As far as paying your share? I don’t think you would think that was fair either.

Comment # 18 left by okie on September 19th, 2006

Mike, you promote hunting for “family bonding” and “skill development”? That sounds absurd.

“Honey, grab the kids! We’re going to spend the night growing closer by killing an animal and watching it spasm during its last few seconds of life!”

Yes, it probably does sound absurd to someone who has walked a different road in life - especially when you mock it. Of course you know that this is not what I meant. Hunting is a means of teaching yourself and your kids about the value of life in a way they will never obtain otherwise. Yes there is noise, but there can also be a contemplation of the value obtained by the sacrifice, and prayer and appreciation that a creature has lived up to its highest ordained calling - to be of use to man.

I reafirm that hunting is a perfectly allowable activity to God if we can kneel before Him with a righteous purpose. He has told us he is pleased if we chose not to, but you cannot conclude from this that He is displease if we do. I maintain He can be just as pleased if we do, depending on the purpose and how it is approached.

As to standing in line at McDonalds being higher moral ground, it probably is when comparing to those who “happily imagine how they murdered the deer”. What about those who give thanks for the meal they’re about to partake, the sacrifice it represents, and the connection to earth and life that was gained in the process?

The Pharases became Pharases by concluding that if a little bit of law is good, a lot must be better, so they read certain things and invented rules that were seemingly in keeping with scripture, then sought to parade around making sure everyone knew the lengths to which they were going to live according to the scriptures (and hence implying that anyone who didn’t live by their interpretation was fit for stoning).

You started this thread saying “I have come to a conclusion” - and are now bound to ridicule anyone who has not also come to that conclusion, as obviously they must have inferior intellect, far less familiarity with the relevant scriptures, a wanton disregard for the sanctity of life, and by golly they just must not be as righteous as me.

Compare with another “conclusion” that many seem to make. Is chocolate and Coke against the Word of Wisdom? If you decide it is for you, then I guess it might be a sin to then break something you believed the Lord was against. Is it for everyone? The Lord has not stated that it is even the semblance of transgression to have some chocolate and an occasional Coke.

“Oh, but clearly it is in the spirit of health!” Well, counting the number of steps taken on the Sabath was also meant “in the spirit of the day”.

Time to move on. You have made your point. Yes, lusting for blood is wicked and unjustified. Was that ever really in question? I hope Okie and I have at least articulated to some readers that they may want to think twice before casting the first stone at those involved in something that may be perfectly righteous, of great value to them, and far from a blood lust is conducted in a spirit of thanksgiving and reverence. Nobody said you had to “get it”. But let those of us who think we do “get something” worthy from hunting carry on, and hopefully we can all shake hands in the Celestial Kingdom when through a quickening we finally see all the things that our life’s experience hid from us.

Mike

Comment # 19 left by Mike B. on September 19th, 2006

Interesting and persuasive counterarguments.

Comment # 20 left by Wade on September 20th, 2006

Thanks Okie and Mike. You have said things that I wanted to but was not able to (as a non-hunter who wouldn’t mind giving it a try sometime).

Comment # 21 left by Eric Nielson on September 20th, 2006

Having an agenda does not invalidate their statistics. Everybody has an agenda.

From my experiences of hunting and hunting trips the joy is the trip

You still haven’t answered why camping and maybe some tracking isn’t good enough, why bring a gun (besides personal safety)?

They enjoy doing something they love that happens to sometimes end with the death of an animal.

This is the perspective I need you to help me understand. Why must it sometimes end with the death of an animal?

This I thought was way beneath your talents.

Yes that was probably a bit too snarky, but Okie, I know you and your sense of humor and believe me I meant it much more as a joke than a barb. I should have included one of these

eat with your family to a burger joint or steak house across town, that the journey there is a miserable, drab bother?

No, as I said earlier I love eating meat, I have leather in my car, etc… I don’t deny that animals were placed here for mankind’s consumption. But death is a violent thing, why should we actively seek out being a part of it. I am thankful for the men who have to work the “dirty jobs” and deal with the processing of meat. I just don’t desire to be a part of the maiming. I can’t wrap my head around why anyone would want to (this answer applies to the “vegan” part of your argument as well)

Hunting is a means of teaching yourself and your kids about the value of life in a way they will never obtain otherwise.

I can see what you are saying here… however, isn’t a feasible solution then to go hunting one time, talk about the sanctity of life and then be done?

The Pharases became Pharases by concluding that if a little bit of law is good, a lot must be better, so they read certain things and invented rules that were seemingly in keeping with scripture

I didn’t quite invent the anti-hunting stance. I too killed my fair share of small creatures (rabbits, birds and such.) Until I read the statements by the prophets that pretty explicitly say that no worthy priesthood holder has a desire to hunt. That’s when I started thinking more about why that statement is accurate. My father is still fighting me tooth and nail on this.

and are now bound to ridicule anyone who has not also come to that conclusion, as obviously they must have inferior intellect,

I apologize if I am came across as ridiculing. Disagreeing with me does not mean I think you have an inferior intellect by default. But I have yet to have anyone explain how they can look down the sight on their gun, see a living creature, shoot it down and watch it die and feel good about it.

All the arguments about herd control, vacations/outings, camraderie, teaching about life, etc.. are all ancillary and can all be accomplished without hunting (on a regular basis). So Okie, Mike, Eric, anybody, why do you want to kill?

Comment # 22 left by Ryan on September 20th, 2006

Ryan,

I haven’t read all of the comments but I assume you are a vegetarian, right?

Comment # 23 left by Geoff J on September 20th, 2006

Not at all.. I love hamburgers and steaks.

Comment # 24 left by Ryan on September 20th, 2006

Ryan,

I haven’t read all of the comments but I assume you are a vegetarian, right?

Whether or not Ryan eats meat or even hunts is irrelevant to his argument. Hypocritical maybe, but any appeal to his character to critique his argument is an ad hominem fallacy.

If one wanted to make an argument that hunting is wrong because unnecessarily killing an animal or causing an animal to suffer is wrong (which Ryan sort of makes), then one could argue (as I do) that eating/supporting factory-farmed meats is far more evil then mere hunting.

Ryan, however, seems to be arguing that hunting (with the intent to kill for sports’ sake) is immoral which I think he argues fairly well.

Comment # 25 left by the narrator on September 20th, 2006

Hypocritical maybe, but any appeal to his character to critique his argument is an ad hominem fallacy.

Hehe… sensitive much Narrator? No need to get bent about my comment — it was a sincere question. (BTW - What does vegetarianism have to do with character anyway?)

As I said, I hadn’t read the comments and have only skimmed them so far, but the title of the post “Punching Holes in God’s Canvass” implies that Ryan thinks it is objectionable to God when we kill animals for food except (presumably) in times of hunger, winter, or famine. I mean a cow or pig or chicken is as much God’s canvass as a deer right?

Anyway, I am certainly not riding any high horses here about eating meat because I eat as much meat as the next American. I was serious in my question — I suspected Ryan was probably a vegetarian when I read the post. It now appears the title and the actual arguments he made were not matched very closely.

Comment # 26 left by Geoff J on September 20th, 2006

It now appears the title and the actual arguments he made were not matched very closely.

Yes well, that’ s kind of my M.O., a good title brings in more traffic you know

Actually I think the title mtaches up okay.. you are thinking of the canvass as material objects (chickens, cows, etc..), I was referring more to an ideal.. that’s why I prefaced my creation canvass with the gospel canvass. The suggestion being that appreciation for life in all it’s forms helps us better understand the personality of God, not just His title. Part of the canvass He has painted provides for the use of plants and animals as a resource unto man… and other animals for that matter. Perhaps an instinctual pleasure in killing is not far removed from the instinctual pleasure in pro-creation.

weird.

Comment # 27 left by Ryan on September 20th, 2006

Sorry I skipped a stop in my train of thought there… I was thinking about animals and wondering if they take a certain pleasure, beyond just the acquisition of food, in the kill. That’s where my killing/sex comparison came from.

/I’m not crazy… or is that what crazy people say?

Comment # 28 left by Ryan on September 20th, 2006

**Warning - Extremely long quote**

(Answers to Gospel Questions)

Is It a Sin to Kill Animals Wantonly?

Question: “I am not writing this in criticism of the Church or even questioning whether the Church is right or wrong, but it is something I have wondered about for a long time. The scriptures seem clear to me that the Lord would rather not have man kill animals unless they are needed to sustain life; and in your ‘Church History and Modern Revelation,’ you present the same thought, even stating that killing for sport is a sin. I fully accept this as being true and have patterned my life accordingly. What I am wondering is why this is not generally taught here where so much hunting is done? I realize that many hunters eat what they kill; but to me this does not justify the killing just as a sport. I would appreciate it if you would express your thoughts on this subject.”

Answer: There is no statement in the scriptures indicating that the flesh of animals and birds and other living creatures was used as food before the days of Noah. It was after the landing of the ark that the Lord gave his commandment concerning the eating of flesh.

It reads in the King James version that this permission was given to Noah and those who came after as follows:

And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.

Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s brother will I require the life of man. (Genesis 9:2-5.)

The Lord revealed this in a different form to the Prophet Joseph Smith as follows:

INTERPRETATION FROM THE INSPIRED VERSION

Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

But, the blood of all flesh which I have given you for meat, shall be shed upon the ground, which taketh life thereof, and the blood ye shall not eat.

And surely, blood shall not be shed, only for meat, to save your lives; and the blood of every beast will I require at your hands. (Holy Scriptures, Genesis 9:9-11. Inspired Version.) (Holy Scriptures, Genesis 9:9-11. Inspired Version.)

The inference in this interpretation is that the use of the flesh of living creatures should be indulged in sparingly although there was no sin in the shedding of their blood when required for food. There is no inference in the scriptures that it is the privilege of men to slay birds or beasts or to catch fish wantonly. The Lord gave life to every creature, both the birds in the heavens, beasts on the earth, and the fishes in the streams or seas. They also were commanded to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. It was intended that all creatures should be happy in their several elements. Therefore to take the life of these creatures wantonly is a sin before the Lord.

It is easy to destroy life, but who can restore it when it is taken? Moreover, were not all creatures commanded to be happy in their spheres at least by implication if not by word? What a dreary world this would be should all life in the heavens above, on the earth, or in the sea be removed? What is more joyful to the ear than the voice of the robin on an early spring morning as he sings his song? The voice of the thrush, the meadow lark, even the bark of a friendly dog, each of them expressing their joy for their existence?

No! Man should be more the friend and never an enemy to any living creature. The Lord placed them here.

A LESSON AS TAUGHT BY JOSEPH SMITH

No doubt most of our readers have read the story of Zion’s Camp on its fateful journey to the relief of their afflicted brethren. Even if you have, it is worth telling here. The Prophet Joseph Smith wrote:

We crossed the Embarras river and encamped on a small branch of the same about one mile west. In pitching my tent we found three massasaguas, or prairie rattlesnakes, which the brethren were about to kill, but I said, “Let them alone—don’t hurt them! How will the serpent ever lose his venom, while the servants of God possess the same disposition, and continue to make war upon it? Men must become harmless, before the brute creation; and when men lose their vicious dispositions and cease to destroy the animal race, the lion and the lamb can dwell together, and the suckling child can play with the serpent in safety.” The brethren took the serpents carefully on sticks and carried them across the creek. I exhorted the brethren not to kill a serpent, bird, or an animal of any kind during my journey unless it became necessary in order to preserve ourselves from hunger.

I had frequently spoken on this subject, when on a certain occasion I came up to the brethren who were watching a squirrel on a tree, and to prove them and to know if they would heed my counsel, I took one of their guns, shot the squirrel and passed on, leaving the squirrel on the ground. Brother Orson Hyde, who was just behind, picked up the squirrel, and said, “We will cook this that nothing may be lost.” I perceived that the brethren understood what I did it for, and in their practice gave more heed to my precept than to my example which was right. (DHC, Vol. 2, pp. 71-72.)

DESTRUCTION OF ANIMAL LIFE SOMETIMES NECESSARY

We all realize that there are times when it is necessary to destroy animal life when it is the survival of the fittest, and they become a plague to mankind.

President Joseph F. Smith many years ago, gave to the youth of the Church this excellent counsel:

I have just a few words to say in addition to those that have already been said, in relation to shedding blood and to the destruction of life. I think that every soul should be impressed by the sentiments that have been spoken, and not less with reference to the killing of our innocent birds, natives of our country, who live upon the vermin that are indeed enemies of the farmer and to mankind. It is not only wicked to destroy them, it is abominable in my opinion. I think that this principle should extend, not only to the bird life, but to life of all animals. When I visited, a few years ago, the Yellowstone National Park, and saw in the streams and the beautiful lakes, birds swimming quite fearless of man, allowing passers-by to approach them as closely almost as tame birds, and apprehending no fear of them, and when I saw droves of beautiful deer herding along the side of the road, as fearless of the presence of men as any domestic animal, it filled my heart with a degree of peace and joy that seemed to be almost a foretaste of that period hoped for when there shall be none to hunt and none to molest in all the land, especially among all the inhabitants of Zion. These same birds, if they were to visit other regions, inhabited by man, would, on account of their tameness, doubtless become more easily a prey to the gunner. The same may be said of those beautiful creatures—the deer and antelope. If they should wander out of the park, beyond the protection which is established there for these animals, they would become, of course, an easy prey to those who were seeking their lives. I never could see why a man should be imbued with a blood-thirsty desire to kill and destroy animal life. I have known men—and they still exist among us—who enjoy what is, to them, the “sport” of hunting birds and slaying them by the hundreds, and who will come in after a day’s sport, boasting of how many harmless birds they have had the skill to slaughter, and day after day, during the season when it is lawful for men to hunt and kill (the birds having had a season of protection and not apprehending danger) go out by scores or hundreds, and you may hear their guns early in the morning on the day of the opening, as if great armies had met in battle; and the terrible work of slaughtering the innocent birds goes on.

I do not believe any man should kill animals or birds unless he needs them for food, and then he should not kill innocent little birds that are not intended for food for man. I think it is wicked for men to thirst in their souls to kill almost everything which possesses animal life. It is wrong. I have been surprised at prominent men whom I have seen whose very souls seemed to be athirst for the shedding of animal blood. They go off hunting deer, antelope, elk, anything they can find, and what for? “Just the fun of it!” Not that they are hungry and need the flesh of their prey, but just because they love to shoot and to destroy life. I am a firm believer, with reference to these things, in the simple words of one of the poets:

“Take not way the life you cannot give,
For all things have an equal right to live.” (Gospel Doctrine, “Man’s Duty to Man.”)

And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear.

The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock; and dust shall be the serpent’s meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the Lord. (Isaiah 65:24-25.)

Is it not an excellent time for man to set the example as the Prophet has said?

Comment # 29 left by Ryan on September 20th, 2006

(Teachings from Lorenzo Snow)

Killing for sport is wrong. In Adam-ondi-Ahman, while gradually recovering from the effects of a malignant fever which had detained me a fortnight in Far West, under the constant and skillful nursing of my sister Eliza, for some time I was unable to either do or read much. One day, to while away the slowly passing hours, I took my gun with the intention of indulging in a little amusement in hunting turkeys, with which that section of the country abounded. From boyhood I had been particularly, and I may say strangely, attached to a gun. Hunting in the forests of Ohio was a pastime that to me possessed the most fascinating attractions. It never occurred to my mind that it was wrong—that indulging in “what was sport to me was death to them;” that in shooting turkeys, squirrels, etc., I was taking life that I could not give; therefore I indulged in the murderous sport without the least compunction of conscience.

But at this time a change came over me. While moving slowly forward in pursuit of something to kill, my mind was arrested with the reflection on the nature of my pursuit—that of amusing myself by giving pain and death to harmless, innocent creatures that perhaps had as much right to life and enjoyment as myself. I realized that such indulgence was without any justification, and feeling condemned, I laid my gun on my shoulder, returned home, and from that time to this have felt no inclination for that murderous amusement. (BLS, pp. 27-28.)

Comment # 30 left by Ryan on September 20th, 2006

[There has always been a philosophy of hunting peculiar to Latter-day Saints.]. . . . It’s a frontier attitude, conquering the West, as it were.

But of course the presidency of the Church has consistently bucked that attitude. Brigham Young, Joseph F. Smith, and then President Kimball have all talked against it. Joseph Smith never carried anything larger than a pen knife. He who carries a gun will surely regret it. Brigham Young said if the Mormon people weren’t so ignorant, they’d be damned for their treatment of the creatures. President Kimball’s bicentennial talk against hunting was very exciting but it had almost no effect whatsoever. They swept it under the rug. We say a prophet is a prophet and then freely interpret how we want.

“Nibley Talks about Contemporary Issues,”

Comment # 31 left by Ryan on September 20th, 2006

Hunting’s not for everybody, but it is for some.

“When I was a boy, I loved to walk in the fields and in the meadows, to swim in the creeks and in the ponds. My father taught me to hunt and to fish.

I enjoyed the great outdoors because it gave me a chance to be with loved ones and to admire the creations of God…

My friends and I spent many happy, carefree hours walking through the meadows or hunting varmints. These animals were considered pests because they ate the tender shoots the livestockmen needed for their sheep to graze on…”
James E. Faust, Friend Magazine… What Is president Faust DOING to our poor, impressionable children?

“Our food supply usually contained venison that my father and older brothers provided for us during the deer hunting season in the late fall—usually during October. The deer hunt was an important event for the family, not only because of the meat that would go into our cold-storage locker, but also because it was an exciting adventure. The boys and men in the family, and sometimes the girls as well, would go into the mountains and make camp for several days. The outing, as much as the hunting, made this an enjoyable event each year. Even now in the later years of my life, as my enthusiasm for hunting has faded, I recall with the fondest of memories those eventful days in the mountains with family and loved ones, when the air was crisp and full of the scent of newly fallen leaves. It was part of the fiber of our lives.”
Dean L Larson, Presidency/ First Q. of the Seventy/ “Bear Tracks”

“When I was a deacon in the Aaronic Priesthood, my father and I went pheasant hunting near Malad, Idaho. The day was Monday—the last day of the pheasant hunting season. We walked through numerous fields in search of pheasants but saw only a few, and those we missed. Dad then said to me, ‘Clark,’ he looked at his watch, ‘let’s unload our guns, and we’ll place them in this ditch. Then we’ll kneel down to pray.’ I thought Dad would pray for more pheasants, but I was wrong. He explained to me that Elder Richard L. Evans of the Quorum of the Twelve was gravely ill and that at 12:00 noon on that particular Monday the members of the Quorum of the Twelve—wherever they may be—were to kneel and, in a way, together unite in a fervent prayer of faith for Elder Evans. Removing our caps, we knelt, we prayed.”
Thomas S. Monson, Quoting his son Clark.
Imagine that, killing harmless birds when he could just run down Costco and get a rotisserie chicken, and then praying in the killing fields, no doubt blood still on his hands. Maybe you should tell him he’s wrong, or ask him why he likes killing so much. Or maybe as I’ve said before, your outlook here is a tad narrow.

Comment # 32 left by Okie on September 21st, 2006

Maybe you should tell him he’s wrong,

Well obviously somebody is wrong here.

Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Lorenzo Snow, Joseph F. Smith, Joseph Fielding Smith Spencer W. Kimball and George Q. Cannon explicitly condemn hunting in both word and deed in an offical capacity.

Monson, Faust and Larson mention hunting anecdotally, never commenting on the doctrine. I imagine if you asked them if every action they took in their personal life was a righteous one by default, they would answer in the negative.

I don’t imagine I would want to show the article by Elder Faust to my children though. I don’t want to have to come up with an explanation when my little child asks me: “Daddy, why does Elder Faust like killing things?”

I suppose that comes across as an attack on Monson, Faust and Larson. It’s not. I honor and sustain these men but that does not mean I think that they are perfect (as all three of them have assuredly admitted). But, for me to accept their stories would put me in a position contrary to clearly stated doctrine.

Comment # 33 left by Ryan on September 21st, 2006

More…

In my life I have enjoyed many so-called adventures, such as hunting exotic game—jaguars, alligators—waterskiing on rivers full of man-eating piranha fish—an expedition into the danger-filled Amazon jungle—looking for gold plates with a religious history on them—single-engine flights in my own airplanes the length of the hemisphere, the width of the continents—even this Miss America year has been an exciting, Cinderella-like adventure.
And why should we have an adventurous mind or an adventurous spirit? The Lord says, “That ye may be prepared in all things … [1] to magnify the calling whereunto I have called you, and [2] the mission with which I have commissioned you.” (D&C 88:80; italics added.)
- Elder Robert E. Wells, Ensign Article
Of the First Quorum of the Seventy - Wow Scripture endorsing Sport Hunting!

The scriptures are full of stories of killing for the sake of a lesson. One prophet had to carve a bow to kill to feed a family and teach a lesson. Why? Couldn’t the Lord send ravens with food or provide manna from heaven? Of course he could have, the lesson taught required an action on that prophets part. That same poor guy already had to kill Laban, had to chop off his head! Why? The Lord could have spared Nephi the sinful act of killing by taking Laban’s life Himself. Hunting isn’t some grand scriptural lesson, it’s a hobby and as I originally said, it’s not for everyone. That doesn’t make it wrong.
President Smith earlier was referring to lustful killing and needless killing. President Kimball quoting the same talk said as much himself. We shouldn’t have in our hearts the wanton destruction of even the most insignificant creature (spiders and flies and what not) without cause. To lust for killing for killings sake is wrong. But sometimes it is proper. Sometimes it justified. Sometimes its just part of who you are. I assume you would join the military if the need arose to protect your family. I sought out the Army, infantry in particular, because that was inside me to do and I loved it. We all have different likes, dislikes, tastes and such. A difference here is not right or wrong, just part of whom we are.

Comment # 34 left by Okie on September 21st, 2006

Love ya Ryan -

Comment # 35 left by Okie on September 21st, 2006

Thank you Ryan for taking time to gather very relevant teachings. Okie’s are also pretty good. I must say I feel I am learning “line upon line”. It is clear from all teachings that if hunting is to be engaged in at all, “sport” should be the furthest thing from our minds. This doesn’t mean we can’t try to enjoy the activity, but foremost in our minds should be the valid purposes for the hunt.

It is clear that one is rarely in the wrong to avoid hunting. I say “rarely” because one might actually find themselves starving or in desparate need to remove pests. If you persisted in avoiding, it may just be plain foolish.

On the otherhand, like the Anti-Nephi-Lehites, if you had made a covenant “not to kill” animals, it seems binding that you carry through in your faith that God will provide a way. If you have made no such covenant, then “God’s way” may very well be, “exercise your dominion, and take what the Lord has given to you.”

In the rattlesnake story, they could not make use of the meat and had an acceptable alternative to deal with the snakes (carry them away). I think Joseph was teaching that killing is not the only way to deal with a problem, and should be a last resort.

I like how he then shot a squirrel to drive his lessons home in their minds - then how they quickly cleaned it for dinner to show they were understanding. To me that’s the essence of how to determine when it’s acceptable to kill and when it’s not. “It is better that one man perish…”. Maybe Joseph concluded, “it is better that one squirrel perish than that these my brethren not learn to properly handle their role as stewards over animal life”.

Over the years I have hunted less and less, partly from a lack of time, but importantly from assessing my purpose for the next potential hunt and deciding that last time I didn’t approach it as reverently as I should have, or with as high of a purpose as I should have, and I really don’t have a valid purpose this time either. For example I don’t really want wild meat sometimes and can easily afford otherwise, I’ve already gained sufficient skill to suit me if ever there were times of trouble, and I’ve had a lot of the “lessons of life” that Joseph taught with the squirrel, and I don’t need to give my kids an annual lesson (too often can lead to “sport and blood-lust”). But when by happenstance I can teach the snake story, and maybe every 3rd or 4th year I can teach my kids the more deliberate squirrel story when I know that it is high time for some sobering, intimate opportunities to ponder our stewardship role over animal life, and I have excellent valid utility in taking the animal such that I am comfortable that God is comfortable.

(Imagine italics: I don’t know how you guys are doing that. I can’t get it to work)

(Me) Hunting is a means of teaching yourself and your kids about the value of life in a way they will never obtain otherwise.

(Ryan) I can see what you are saying here… however, isn’t a feasible solution then to go hunting one time, talk about the sanctity of life and then be done?

I think yes that probably is the way to do it. I don’t think “one time” really drives it home, but to target practice for the skill, and while practicing teach about not only when and why to hunt, but also when and why to go to war, when and how to defend yourself from criminals, etc.

Then every so often actually go hunting when the purpose makes sense (like rangers saying half the deer will starve this year, I’m not “hungry” but my mortgage does expose me to danger - and filling the freezer could save me $1000).

(Ryan) I have yet to have anyone explain how they can look down the sight on their gun, see a living creature, shoot it down and watch it die and feel good about it.

This is part of the real essence and value behind hunting. “Experience” is what really teaches us. If one is to ever really learn how to hunt in the most respectable, honorable way, then one must start at square one hopefully with a master teacher who can guide you away from the “natural man” instincts of excitement and even sadistic pleasure in having located and conquered the object of the hunt. You “naturally” start out either completely turned off by hunting (for which you will be perfectly justified), or completely “turned on” by hunting, for which you need to learn to handle the fire. I worry that those with a tendency to be turned on by hunting will end up feeding their tendency through violent video games much worse for the mind and spirit than learning when and where to kill even mankind -and yes, Captain Moroni is a lesson that there is a proper time to engage in killing mankind, and there is a lot of skill, proper perspective, and “knowing when enough is enough”.

You really make me think. Next time I look down the sight of a gun, before I pull the trigger I need to check my soul and ask, “Why am I doing this?” Yes, I’m sure I will have a sense of satisfaction in locating the object of the hunt, and in that sense “feel good about it”. I hope the answer to “Why?” is also founded in a prior, prayerful decision as to why I even find myself with a gun. If the Spirit speaks to my soul that my purposes meet with the Lord’s approval, then again I will “feel good about it”. If ever my “feeling good about it” is based in the natural man, then the sensation is sadistic, and I must ultimately repent or be damned to a lesser Kingdom.

Ryan, Connor, Narrator, Okie, others…I don’t suppose we’re really all that far apart in our views in the end - we’re all just grappling to get our arms around a tough subject. To me the words of the Prophets give clear warning that there are a lot of dangerous character trends that are possible via hunting that we need to stay far from, and we certainly won’t be tempted by them if we simply remove ourselves from the potential. Reminds me rich men, camels, and needles. Maybe it’s not impossible to engage in hunting with an eye single to the glory of God, but there are few who find the way. Don’t know if I ever will, but I’ll keep trying until I either find it or just throw in the towel and only kill deer with my car

I’m not offended and sorry I snapped back, in which I probably offended you. Your humble response proves you are no Pharasee, as I felt inclined to label you. Sorry for my rush to judgement. I suppose that those involved in searching like we’ve been doing via blogging might all have the Nicodemus brand of Pharasee in them. I think he was really an honest truth seeker, and was trying to please God as best as he could figure out. I sense you are all that way.

I’m so long winded. It’s nearly my biggest failing. I don’t know how to be shorter. My posts on my own sight are really long like this too, but the subjects are very interesting.

I still haven’t really figured out what I’m doing. I’ve been writing all summer but just got my site online a couple weeks ago, and I’m no HTML or blog pro. I’ve set up my site with “essays” intended to last for years as a repository of my thoughts that interested parties may Google across. I want to make them “lively” so they can get a 3-day string of several posts, but I’ve tried to organize it for years and not days. Do any of you know how to put a “recent comments” on the sidebar?

Maybe a better way to get discussion on subjects from my site is to post a short version to something like BloggerOfJared that has high patronage. Anyone know how I can do something like that?

Sorry for the pain inflicted. If you read the whole of all my comments, don’t you just feel like you were hunted down and shot?

Mike Brown
www.latterdaylogic.com
travel.model@gmail.com

Comment # 36 left by Mike B. on September 21st, 2006

Captain Moroni is a lesson that there is a proper time to engage in killing mankind

or maybe mormon was using moroni to justify his killing of mankind.

Comment # 37 left by the narrator on September 22nd, 2006

I looked for an email address that went to the admin of this site, because I wanted to let you know that the links to Blogger of Jared at LDSelect.org and Times and Seasons are broken.

I came here this morning from ldsblogs, and realized I have been missing out on many great conversations (like this one), because I thought BoJ had disbanded. Anyway, you should check your links at the other websites and ask the admins to update them if they don’t work.

Comment # 38 left by ECS on September 23rd, 2006

Mike,

Phenomenal. Whether I agree or disagree, you at least offered what seems to be an acceptable answer to my questions regarding motive. (By the way I was absolutely not offended by your rebuttals, I post in a public forum and I consequently expect to have my perspectives torn apart critically.)

I will investigate a guest posting period at BoJ, and get back to you shortly.

Comment # 39 left by Ryan on September 23rd, 2006

Post a comment