Banning hunting no solution to illegalities (2)

Maurice Mizzi considers hunting morally wrong and rambles on about hunters “wasting their time and intelligence killing God’s creatures” in what he terms a “wicked obsession that has no place in modern society”. This is nothing new from one chronically obsessed with banning hunting.

What people prefer to do with their time and intelligence is none of Mr Mizzi’s business. However, should they choose to kill God’s creatures, provided they do so within the law, their least concern is bothering about the opinion of a person who evaluates the world’s progress upon “five-year-olds switching on their computer to see how wonderful a peaceful world can be”. Yes, as Mr Mizzi rightly states, “defenceless” birds do fly some “300 kilometres” before being legally shot as they land in Malta. But then again, fish too travel great distances and are equally “defenceless”.

Our farmed animals are lucky to never fly at all, let alone fly 300 kilometres, yet they are all fattened and slaughtered for our convenience.

Production of local poultry (“defence­less” birds of the same type hunters shoot, but referred to as domesticated) runs into approximately 4,000 tons a year. So where do Mr Mizzi’s morals stand with regard to the killing of these “defenceless God’s creatures”?

Does he only talk about morals where hunting is concerned? Is fishing, according to his logic, also a “wicked obsession”? Is animal husbandry morally wrong? He seems to ignore the fact that hunting is the taking of game birds within regulated norms with the specific intention of eating one’s catch, no less than recreational fishing is a means of supplementing one’s diet of fish.

These activities stem from one’s closeness to nature as opposed to many, including Mr Mizzi, who buy their meat off shelves in freezers. Yet all meat derives from the killing of “God’s defenceless creatures”, so unless Mr Mizzi has never consumed any such creatures he is not one to preach about morals.

He does, however, have the right to be obsessed about banning what others do with their time and intelligence since, considering his logic, he still has to decipher how to combine both in order to make sense.