killing butterflies for fun???

[Grkovich, Alex]

Listen, the argument being made here (by anti-collectors) is hypocritical.
And this is why: Unless the anti-collector happens to be a Saint and lives
on wild honey and water, he or she EATS ANIMALS AND/OR FISH MEAT AND PLANTS
(it has been demonstrated that gently stroking a plant encourages growth of
the plant; thus, the plant can sense when it's being torn up and destroyed;
anyway the plant is a living thing, right?). Also, we may assume that most
(if not all) anti-collectors kill flies and mosquitoes, apply pesticides to
the grass, many no doubt toss cigarette butts onto the street or out of
their cars, etc. etc. 

So, they are not righteous any more than I (a collector) am. So thus the
argument is a matter of hypocrisy. And one that I have also stopped paying
any attention to (with exception this post).

Also, Joseph Sugar exists and will come again (in the form of some other
name and argument). Maybe he and Betty are one.

Again, Neil, you always have something to say.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Neil Jones [SMTP:neil at nwjones.demon.co.uk]
> Sent:	Thursday, July 05, 2001 9:02 AM
> To:	leps-l at lists.yale.edu
> Subject:	Re: killing butterflies for fun???
> 
> On Thursday 04 July 
> 2002 12:16 am, Kenelm Philip wrote:
> > Two people have posted to the effect that killing butterflies while
> driving
> >
> > is irrelevant to arguments over collecting:
> > > But I would expect that none of them would argue in support of their
> > > pastime or vocation with that over-used car casualty scenario.
> > >
> > > The car casualty argument is actually a very very poor point.
> >
> > So _why_ is the car casualty argument so poor? In the state of Illinois,
> > an estimated 20 million butterflies are killed per _week_ along the road
> > system. Compared to that, the depredations of collectors are pretty
> minor
> > (provided they are not affecting endangered species).
> >
> > Note that in law, if you drive your car carelessly through a crowd and
> kill
> > 100 people, I think you will draw a longer prison term than if you
> deliber-
> > ately murder a single person. 100 shorter sentences add up fast...
> >
> 
> It really is quite simple. I don't agree with the argument but I
> understand 
> why it is put forward. It is a question of _volition_.  To extend your 
> analogy further a driver is driving a roadworthy vehicle down a street
> quite 
> slowly within the legal speed limit, suddenly a small child runs out from 
> behind a parked car just feet in front of him and is killed. In this case
> the 
> driver cannot be held to blame because he had no control over what
> happens.
> However driving carelessly though a crowd is something you _have_ control 
> over. The same is true for people who accidentally hit butterflies with
> the 
> car it is _accidental_. The objection that these people have is to the 
> _deliberate_ killing of butterflies.
> 
> When you use an argument what doesn't address the real issue it is seen as
> 
> being evasive.
> 
> 
> >
> >         From the _butterflies'_ point of view, drivers are far more of a
> > menace, and most of the people who object to collecting would probably
> > like to think that they are 'speaking for the butterflies'.
> 
> > Why is it OK to kill myriads of insects as we go about our lives, but
> > positively evil to pick out kill a single insect for one's curiosity
> > about the natural world? Curiosity about the natural world is how I go
> >about my life--so I fail to see the difference.
> >
> >                                                Ken Philip
> 
> Let me reiterate that I am not interested in banning colllecting. I do not
> 
> believe that it is morally wrong to kill insects. However, some people do.
> People do believe in odder things than that. There are people who believe 
> that native americans are decended from the lost tribes of israel!
> 
> I quote Andrew Lees for two reasons.
> 
> 1. He was an inspirational conservationist who helped conserve one of my 
> favourite wildlife sites in the UK and he died in Madagascar fighting to
> save 
> a tropical forest. Like me he worked to conserve _habitats_ and I like his
> 
> quotation because it fits what I do. 
>  
> 2. When I was asked for help in designing the memorial. I suggested using
> the 
> quote used in his obituary by the organisation for whom he worked.
> Naturally 
> being a butterfly conservationist I would wouldn't I. :-) Using the
> memorial 
> quote myself has therefore an element of irony that appeals to me.
> 
> Next time I go to Crymlyn Bog I will have to take some pictures of the 
> memorial and the bog itself to put on the web.
> 
> --
> Neil Jones- Neil at nwjones.demon.co.uk http://www.butterflyguy.com/
> "At some point I had to stand up and be counted. Who speaks for the
> butterflies?" Andrew Lees - The quotation on his memorial at Crymlyn Bog
> National Nature Reserve
> 
>  
>  ------------------------------------------------------------ 
> 
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
> 
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl 
>  

 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl