I feel like stirring up some controversy, this is a topic I feel semi-strongly about, and I've got some free time on my hands, so I've decided to post about animal rights. Basically, my feeling about it is that animals have no rights and the very idea is silly to me. If it benefits mankind in some way, I see no problem with harming some animals.

Take hunting for example. I don't hunt and never will for two reasons: one, I don't like guns very much and wouldn't feel very safe holding one in my hand; and two, deer or birds or things that one might hunt are animals that I enjoy observing, and I would feel sad knowing I killed one. But I don't think hunting is wrong or unethical. I enjoy going fishing, because fish taste good and I don't feel bad about killing them. The only way I would object to hunting is if it were an endangered species, because that actually affects the entire ecosystem, which of course includes people.

Also, another thing that bugs me is that I've heard from time to time something like this: "If you were to kill off all the gnats in the world, the entire ecosystem would collapse; but if you were to kill off all the people, things would only get better." First off, the entire ecosystem wouldn't collapse, but yes, it would get worse, and people do in general pollute the environment and make it worse, so I get the general point. But to me, making this point as one defending environmentalism seems to be missing the point. I do my part to keep the environment clean, but for the reason that a poor environment harms mankind. To me, environmentalism purely for the environment's sake seems silly.

Oh my, I've been rambling up a storm. Well, I think I've covered my views on this pretty ok. Comments?

Char "this is my first opinionated post, oh boy" on