Eh, anti hunters, when they are a "friend"...

[Daryl]

The title of this thread is confusing.

1. The anti's are not your friends.

2. If an anti IS your friend, refer back to rule #1.

Daryl

[freakintoguns]

Tell you r Friend Bambi ended up in some hunter's wife's Cooking pot. and God Gave us Dominon over beasts to make sure they didnt get out of hand. ever met a liberal bear? i havent

[VaFisher]

Like I said before,

It's simple, you can't be a true friend to a anti so why try. Keep your friendship where it belongs and that's with folks that think like yourself instead of someone from mars or venus.

I will take it a step more, a true freind would not tell you how wrong you are for killing or hunting.
Instead they would ask why and give you a chance to explain so they would understand, some it up for you.

It's simple, you can't be a true friend to a anti so why try. Keep your friendship where it belongs and that's with folks that think like yourself instead of someone from mars or venus.

[shortwave]

As previously stated this line of thought is not isolated to Europe. We have an increasing anti sentiment right here in the "good ole US of A". Pahoo`s acts(thoughts) of education sure beats just cutting someone off. Isn`t educating people about guns a tool we all use to show them our views on guns. Granted alot will never change but if you can convert one, its worth it. PS, I`ve fed my none hunting, killing a deer is terrible in-laws venison whenever I get a chance. They`ve eaten more than they know.

[Musketeer]

Those who think all Europeans are anti gun and anti hunting are as ignorant of some of the Europeans who think all Americans are murderers for hunting and teaching their children to be bloodthirsty killers.

Stupidity is Stupidity, from the left or the right.

Personally I have been to Europe several times for work. I enjoy Switzerland in October and November as it is game season. I normally come back bloated from many meals featuring wild boar, pheasant, venison, and just about every other type of game which can be taken. Most of these are prepared in old restaurants where trophies are on display. One of my hotels in particular and more trophies from Africa than I could shake a stick at displayed along with the firearms and was also two doors down from the gun shop where the owner let me handle several arms. I bought several pocket knives from him as gifts for people at home.

On top of that experience our facility over there has an annual rifle shoot where plenty of full auto arms show up given they are all kept at home as part of their army.

Now there are certainly ignorant people in Europe with regards to shooting and hunting. I also would wager that in the "western" European nations the percentage of them is higher than it is here. It is outright ignorance though to claim that all in Europe are leftist, anti gun and anti hunting. The most conservative people I know there are actually in France and are pro gun, completely against the spread of Islamic Extremism and very anti-socialist...

[MeekAndMild]

Pahoo`s acts(thoughts) of education sure beats just cutting someone off.

I don't know about that. At work I spend much of the day every day telling people the same old stuff. "Too much alcohol and street drugs and sitting at home watching Oprah and not exercising will make you stay depressed until you change. No you're not disabled but you have a problem with motivation and education so you need to develop a plan to get your GED and take training so you can get a better job or after 2 years of appeals the disability office will give you a final denial and you'll go back to flipping burgers. Et cetera". Then the next day there is a whole new crop of lazy assed dopers who need the same individually tailored but highly repetitive lecture. :barf:

The trouble is that when you get any sort of shared cultural delusion going, whether it is "we can stay high and sit on the couch all the time without consequences" or "the government owes us all a living" or "hunting is bad" you're only one person telling them the truth but they have a hundred or a million friends reinforcing the delusion.

Sorry, but the only thing which will change this mindset is going to be famine or flood or war or something else horrible. Pray that its not another holocaust.

[Adrian]

Originally Posted by Desertfox

It's a good thing our predecessors didn't think it was immoral to kill and eat.
Way back to rock and stick hunters in caves, we have hunted and eaten.

Morality isn't a hunting issue.

I think that morality absolutely is an issue in hunting.

Many of our ancestors didn't think it was immoral to kill and eat, as you put it, but by no means all. The Jain religion believes that eating meat is an unecessary violence upon the world. Many Buddhists and Hindus agree. Even for those who ate meat, though, it had a lot more significance than the modern quick trip to McDonalds. It's custom in many Native American tribes, after a successful hunt, to give thanks to the animal for its sacrifice. Kosher and halal laws dictate that certain animals are unclean, and prohibit their consumption; those that are allowed must be killed in certain humane ways. It's important not to take food for granted; it's important to understand what it means.

Hunting is a return to that. Have you ever held off the trigger to let an animal grow, or do you just blast the first one you see? Would you shoot a wild sow trailing piglets, or would you leave it so there are more to hunt next year? The hunter necessarily recognizes the violence involved and decides upon its morality.

I don't know about you, but I think that's a more-ethical position than unthinking consumption.

[MeekAndMild]

The Jain religion believes that eating meat is an unecessary violence upon the world. Many Buddhists and Hindus agree.

Consider the case of two creeds in conflict. One strong belief against killing is found in Tibetan Buddhism. Another strong belief in killing first and fastest is found in Chinese Communism. Which side is thriving and which is dwindling in Tibet?

[hogdogs]

All's I know is our pilgrim ancestors were some starvin' sunz-a-bucks 'til them NATIVES showed up with some corn and wild turkey, likely venison too...
Brent

[VaFisher]

Personally I think every human when born has a natural urge to hunt but if not taught the right way they do not understand or cultivate their abilities to learn how to hunt right so they end up losing what was natural in the first place. I would guess they then turn into what we would call a anti if they end up around the wrong kind of people or they could end up in a much worst stage in life just simply wanting to control others like most Democrats that are elected.

[FrontSight]

I couldn't take it anymore, this was the last straw, when I kept pointing out that she ate meat & Foie Gras (where the geese are force fed till their livers bloat to 10x normal size):

-----Original Message-----
From: Anti
To: Me

can we agree to disagree...

Here was my response:

Oh come on. You want to just dismiss this all, like we never had these conversations?

I've sent you facts, scientific data, statistics and quotes from studies, proof of why hunting and guns are important for the ecosystem and human lives, and examples of how you yourself enjoy all the fruits of hunting and eating the meat of once living, breathing animals and are therefore being hypocritical.

In return all you've done is respond with calling me "murderer, redneck, blood thirsty, insane, mad, disgusting, bad father figure, brainwashed, etc etc etc."

You haven't given me one single fact, not one single scientific study citation, not one single follow up on the facts I have sent you, not one iota of research, etc. Just strict emotion, finger pointing, refusal to answer to any of my logical arguments with a logical response, and name calling from you.


And now, after all of your insulting name calling, finger pointing, failure to give one shred of logical support for your views, lack of admission & acknowledgment of your hypocrisy and emotion based rationalization and apology for your insults, you want to just drop this? You toss all that at me and don’t back up any of it or take a second to consider that it might be true and label me and my family with derogatory terms and then you just want to drop it?? How very convenient for you.


Hhmmm, if "redneck" means "someone who is ignorant, backwards, biased, closed minded, insulting, hypocritical, blind & dismissive of scientific facts and figures, resists learning at all costs, stubborn as a mule, rooted in emotion instead of scientific logic, condemns things without first personally experiencing and understanding them, unable to connect the relationship of their very own actions with those they condemn, dismissive of all facts and challenges when backed into a corner, unapologetic, self righteous and considers themselves to be better than others because they won't or can't even take the brain power necessary to see the flaws in their lack of logic and hypocritical actions", then I think it's pretty clear from our discourse who the "redneck" is, L.


If you're going to take a stance and insult me on mine then at least have the courtesy to both support your stance and disprove mine with more than just insults and dismissiveness when challenged.

[hogdogs]

I would love to be a fly on their wall when they dig into a smoked ham and halfway thru it they learn that the hog was run, stopped, bayed by currs and caught by bulldogs...
Brent

[Brian Pfleuger]

Here was my response:

Any reply?

[FrontSight]

hogdog, never mind being there when they carve into it...I wanna be there when that actual hunt is going on!!

peetzakilla: she is in Ireland, so she's gone for the night...won't be back till tomorrow. either way it doesn't really matter; I have realized she is just like all other animal rights nuts. I.E. she can't defend her position with a single scientific or logical point, she never answers a challenge to do so, she doesn't see her own actions as equivalent to or "worse" than hunting, and she brushes off science and logic and replaces it with emotion. In other words, she's mentally incapable of logical & rational thought, and thinks others are wrong for their logical views.

Scary, man....very scary.

[Musketeer]

In return all you've done is respond with calling me "murderer, redneck, blood thirsty, insane, mad, disgusting, bad father figure, brainwashed, etc etc etc."

Understand that those who base their decisions on primarily emotional criteria see no reason not to respond with emotion. In her eyes calling you all of those things was perfectly correct, left thinking play book 101.

I guarantee you the next response you get will be shock at how emotional you have gotten about this whole thing.

[hogdogs]

Musketeer has a valid point! Look at what peta has said to our kids in OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS about their parents who hunt!!! As a small boy I was a bit crass, not too PC and quick to speak my mind... ( I BET THAT IS A SHOCKER HUH) had them nut jobs come in there saying those things to my 2nd or 3rd grade class I would have burped a good venison belch and proceeded to give them my opinion of bambi, thumper and all the rest of them tasty critters. I may have even been a bit "acidic" as they are speaking of those who meant the most to me!
My Gramps may have been a drunk but my memories of that are minuscule compared to times in the ice shanty spearing pike, sitting next to him on the snow while he put the crosshairs on a buck and barked one off from that winny 94... Actually I still get a knot in my throat at those memories! They are whole heartedly invited to KMA and GTFO!!!
Brent

[jammin1237]

this may be slightly off key, but who is going to save the plants? can you imagine the pain that these living things go through when they are just plucked from there environment and brutally chopped up and devoured by some mindless human who has no respect for God or nature... i cant even fathom the amount sap and plant matter on the hands of those vegan killers...........

[Desertfox]

Adrian you confuse ethics with morals. I may choose to pass on a small buck to harvest him a few years later or pass on a sow with piglets in tow for similar reasons.
I may pass on a bad shot or shot angle etc. but it is due to my ethical thought process, not morals. Ethically, a bad shot causes me and other hunters a wasted harvest or worse a shot with questionable background.

A good clean shot on an animal, I wish to harvest is always my intent.
No, I don't blast everything that moves in the woods. Thanks for the implication, but wrong guy. Yes, I have and do pass on game more than I shoot due to choice. I choose to utilize my tag on a mature animal and may pass on lesser for that reason. Not because it is morally wrong to harvest a button buck or yearling, but because it is a choice to let them grow bigger to fill more pots.
I have taken 4 new hunters to the deer woods this year. Two 10 year old boys and their dad, and later a cousin. One boy shot a doe.(opening day of youth season) The other shot a 5 point.(2 days later in the same stand) Dad harvested a doe a few weeks later with me using a muzzleloader for the first hunt. (spot and stalk) I put him and his cousin (13) in a double man leaning stand 3 days ago. They watched does all morning waiting on a buck. No harvest yet, but he is hooked. Morally, I feel like I did a great thing.
I enjoy being in the woods on the hunt. If I pass early season shots, it may be for that reason also.

[hogdogs]

I do not shoot everything that walks... I never shoot a spotted fawn or a button buck as a buck. I will shoot a button as a doe during that portion. I rather not shoot a bruiser as it is likely to be harsher in flavor than a youngster.
As for a sow with piglets... If there is a sustained population in the area a nursing piglet can nurse on other mothers with milk. They routinely care for each other's young. Since a pig is a pig, my dogs have wiped out many young pigs when the adults give them the slip by running thru a gob of little ones. But My source of hunting permission is double edged as I am there to remove a nuisance anyway. we have cooked 12-20 pounders often and that is some tender tasty pork. As for deer, small is fine and I am after quantity to fill freezers and not just mine. But I don't care for tracking gut shot deer so I try for DRT shots. Clean, ethical kill but morals are, IMHO, something left 'tween humans or regarding obscene perversions...
Brent

[Adrian]

Originally Posted by MeekAndMild

Consider the case of two creeds in conflict. One strong belief against killing is found in Tibetan Buddhism. Another strong belief in killing first and fastest is found in Chinese Communism. Which side is thriving and which is dwindling in Tibet?

Are you suggesting that the Communist Chinese hold a morally superior position on the matter?

I'm not saying that violence is unnecessary, if you'll actually read my post, only that it should never be taken lightly. People can decide where they draw their lines of comfortable violence, but it's delusional (at best) to condemn something that you pay others to do for your pleasure. I think most people here can agree with that.

I'm not even sure what Desertfox is reading into my post anymore. I get the feeling that we're talking across each other, and if someone can explain to me what he thinks I'm saying, I'll be happy to address it.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by Desertfox

Adrian you confuse ethics with morals.

Merriam-Webster

Ethics:
a: a set of moral principles : a theory or system of moral values


Morals:
a: moral practices or teachings : modes of conduct b: ethics


Same:
1 a: resembling in every relevant respect b: conforming in every respect —used with as
2 a: being one without addition, change, or discontinuance : identical b: being the one under discussion or already referred to
3: corresponding so closely as to be indistinguishable

[Byron Quick]

I've a number of friends from Europe. Many are gunnies. None are antis. I don't have friends who are anti-hunting or anti-firearms. Personally, if some woman said such to me and we were on a date, I'd take her home and she would never hear from me again.

I was on a first date with a young lady one night and the talk came to firearms.
She didn't know at the time just how strong my interest in guns was or that I carry. She made the remark early on that guns were not allowed in her home.

I immediately, politely, but flatly replied,"Then I will never cross the threshhold into your home."

She invited me inside at the end of the evening. I told her that I was carrying a pistol and that I would always be carrying a pistol. She told me to come in anyway and the issue was never raised again.

With many people remarks such as hers are merely kneejerk responses and are not deeply held principles.

Now she never became a shooter or hunter and the relationship eventually withered on the vine. But guns or hunting were never an issue again.

Sometimes a blunt 'I hunt and shoot, will always hunt and shoot...if you cannot accept this then we need to part ways' is the best way to handle these people. Let them know right at the beginning that your position is firm and unyielding.

[FrontSight]

She again tried to brush it off and said she was being diplocatic all along, and I let her have it again.

BUT that's nothing. She later told me that a black friend of hers from the UK said that I belong in the KKK!!



Check it out:


HER:

To be honest any of those emails I barely skimmed through I dont want to insult you by telling you what I think of people who hunt or who are pro-busy. Surely you can see what the rest of the world thinks? Can we leave it at this. Yes, I had detailed discussions with Matt and many of my other american friends about politics etc... but, unfortunately, as explained from that night at dinner could never have with you. Its never made me change what I think of you as a person. I just wouldnt agree with your values and Im getting very wound up reading this [color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color] if Ive to be honest whilst trying to be diplomatic with you by not being insulting so, can we please leave this and as I said agree to disagree.

MY REPLY:

So there's a diplomatic way of calling a friend a murderer for hunting, even while you are eating meat at the same moment?

And there's a diplomatic way of calling a friend a redneck, while not even listening to their educated explanation of why their actions are scientifically proven to be sound & necessary for a healthy ecosystem?

And there's a diplomatic way of telling a friend that they are akin to being a Hitler supporter because they think it's a good idea to stand up and fight the terrorists that have killed thousands of their fellow americans over the past 30 years, while not ever once providing an idea of a better, counter solution instead of fighting? I'm still waiting to hear one from you, but it never comes...


Is that the way you act Diplomatic? You just toss out insults and denounce people as backwards and fascists but never consider the other person's sound, logical, scientific, valid points, nor provide any sound, logical, valid, scientific points of your own? And then you throw up your hands and just say that it's impossible to talk about these matters with them?


That makes sense to you?? That is how you debate?? That is how you come to "logical" conclusions in your life??


I would debate these matters with you in a logical, adult manner for decades, and I would listen to all of your points and rebut every single one in kind with logical points of my own as I have done so far, and it would never come between us.

But you don't or can't do the same...all you do is insult and replace logic with emotion and say "everyone else feels this way too" (as if that's a logical argument that holds any water; would you follow them off a bridge??) and then you are incredulous over being called out on it.


That is not being diplomatic by any stretch of the imagination. It's akin to a schoolground argument where one of the children yells "poopy-head!!" at another before running off to play hop-scotch.

Here is the kicker!!

HER:

I was telling Ben... lol... this is what he told me to tell you:
That you should 'join the KKK or combat18 although i hear they dont think people of italian ancestry are pure white'

AND THEN I LOST IT, AND I AM DONE WITH HER!

MY RESPONSE:

OH....MY...F*CKING...GOD...what the F*CK is that [color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color]??!!

How the HELL do you two equate my support of our Founding Fathers' Original Bill of Rights that declared our God Given Rights, which they fought so valiantly for, that they sacredly compiled after being oppressed by a cruel British Govt and King for so many years & tried to peacefully resolve over & over & over to no avail, that they realized are the basic necessities for freedom, that formed the Greatest Nation That Has Ever Existed On This Planet, with a hate group like the KKK???!!!


The Bill of Rights is about FREEDOM and JUSTICE, and granting the people the TOOLS to BE FREE AND STAND UP AGAINST OPPRESSION!!


And you two mock it and align it with a racist, murderous, hateful group like the KKK??!! What the hell is wrong with you??!!


Jesus Almighty you two are seriously ignorant and don’t have a clue of anything that America stands for! You have NO IDEA how opressed you are. You are like lambs in a slaughter house & have been fooled onto thinking that it's ok to be that way.

You've been told you don’t have any rights to anything except what the govt deems you are fit to have, and you've been told this lie for so long that you think anyone who declares they have God Given rights is insane and a hate group member??!!


Jesus Christ, WAKE UP AND GET EDUCATED!!


Have you ever read the Declaration of Independence?? Have you ever read the Original Bill of Rights??


Here, why don't the two of you take a few minutes to get educated on what the God Given Rights of a Free Person are by reading the Original Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence...they lay out the rights you have been told that you don't deseve over there so many times that you actually believe it.



READ THIS, AND I MEAN REALLY, REALLY READ IT, AND THEN TELL ME THAT ALL HUMAN BEINGS DON'T DESERVE THESE GOD-GIVEN RIGHTS??!! THAT ANY OF THIS IS FOUNDED ON HATE??!! What the hell do they teach you in your schools??!!


"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

And you two equate my support of this and the Bill of Rights to being a KKK Member???!! Jesus Almighty God, what the hell have you been taught??



ORIGINAL BILL OF RIGHTS

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures , shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue , but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.


Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.



DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE


IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

— John Hancock

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

[Brian Pfleuger]

She's crazy.


Though I do find your discussion of God-given rights interspersed with using said Gods name in profane ways to be interesting... but that's another topic.

[FrontSight]

peetzakilla: Eh, I'm from NY, what do you expect?