| Author |
Topic:
Should the killing of bald eagles be allowed? [Locked] |
Fozzie_Bear  Posts: 2,490
Registered: 2001-12-20 01:43:43
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Should the killing of bald eagles be allowed? |
jeune posted:
Fozzie_Bear posted:
getting back to the actual OP though,
if the KILLING of the bird is part of a/the religious ceremony of the Native Americans than we shouldn't be getting in the way of that so long as it happens on the reservation unless otherwise stated in treaty.
Aside from that if we are furnishing requests for the feathers without killing the birds and that satisfies the ceremony, why kill the bird? its not like we're passing off pidgeon feathers as eagle feathers or something.
I think that the U.S. govt just collects the dead ones they find naturally... like killed from high power electricity wires. The problem is that there is a huge waiting list and it can take forever to get what you need for a ceremony because you have to wait for them to find a dead bird.
well isn't that the sad but true fact of a species that until the US government enacted steps was on the verge of vanishing off the face of the planet? Regardless of how they got there, its nice that their numbers are starting to increase to the point of not being so critical.
Hunting the birds in the US is prohibited but since the reservation is supposed to be a separate nation, isnt that like the US telling Mexico and Canada they cant hunt them on their own land? It would be a sad fact if the birds vanished off the reservation due to overhunting by native americans but that not the problem or fault of the US at that point. It would be a Tribal issue.
if the problem is that Native Americans want to hunt the birds on US soil and feel its right because they simply are native americans, then thats a different thing altogether.
-----signature-----
The Oatmeal Butterscotch paired with a Snickerdoodle
turned my cynical penis into a happy vagina
Then after an Oatmeal Cranberry and Double Chocolate,
it made my new vagina spontaneously sing the Trolololo Song in an elevator.
---AkagiyamaMissile
|
jeune  Posts: 216
Registered: 2005-5-29 13:25:11
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Should the killing of bald eagles be allowed? |
Fozzie_Bear posted:
well isn't that the sad but true fact of a species that until the US government enacted steps was on the verge of vanishing off the face of the planet? Regardless of how they got there, its nice that their numbers are starting to increase to the point of not being so critical.
Hunting the birds in the US is prohibited but since the reservation is supposed to be a separate nation, isnt that like the US telling Mexico and Canada they cant hunt them on their own land? It would be a sad fact if the birds vanished off the reservation due to overhunting by native americans but that not the problem or fault of the US at that point. It would be a Tribal issue.
if the problem is that Native Americans want to hunt the birds on US soil and feel its right because they simply are native americans, then thats a different thing altogether.
Native are also U.S. citizens and subject to the same laws as everyone else... I think native people were probably very supportive of the law when it first went into effect. Because the bird is such in important part to many of their cultures... I believe all of the treaties have provisions that allow them to hunt/fish/collect in their natural and accustomed areas that they ceded to the U.S.
Honestly I think it is just the environmentalist that are causing a lot of the fights now... I think Natives next battle is going to be with the environmentalist... they do not see resources and the environment in the same way. Natives love the environment but how they see it is so differently... Natives see themselves living with the environment and environmentalist see the environment as free from humans.
-----signature-----
"Whenever the white man treats the Indian as they treat each other then we shall have no more wars. We shall be all alike — brothers of one father and mother, with one sky above us and one country around us and one government for all."
|
Fozzie_Bear Posts: 2,490
Registered: 2001-12-20 01:43:43
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Should the killing of bald eagles be allowed? |
I would think the environmentalists view it as simple math. You have 100 birds and 1000 Indians that want their feathers.
-----signature-----
The Oatmeal Butterscotch paired with a Snickerdoodle
turned my cynical penis into a happy vagina
Then after an Oatmeal Cranberry and Double Chocolate,
it made my new vagina spontaneously sing the Trolololo Song in an elevator.
---AkagiyamaMissile
|
|
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Should the killing of bald eagles be allowed? |
Reapist posted:
We already give American Indians too many rights. We gave them so the could continue to live as they always had lived, but they no longer live this way. They use modern methods to harvest fish and crabs. The live in houses instead of teepees. Many lay around and collect free money then blow it on alcohol and worse. Our biggest mistake, as a country, was to make all the concessions we did then push them off onto reservations and isolate them so they could not be absorbed. If we had let nature take its course we wouldn't have the issues we have now. It is our own fault. Any group of people will say whatever they think will work to make you give them things.
Wait and see how jeune responds here.
Come on, really? teepees weren't actually used a ton anywhere, but especially living in washington you should know, most of the tribes of the NW DID live in houses.
More to the point, I don't see why they should have to stick to their old ways to be allowed to use land that was generally bullied away from them but often just taken away. It is annoying for the united states, no question. It seems outdated and generally pointless. 'Most of them don't even use their money wisely.' There are a ton of reasons people use to talk about absorbing them. But NONE of them address the fact that it is just straight up THEIR land. That's like you stealing my house, and I manage to escape with my playstation, but years later you argue that I shouldn't have my playstation because I am not really getting good at any games, and YOU are super good at them. What makes america deserve to absorb their lands? America has far less claim to them than anyone else if it is for some reason proven that they didnt deserve their own lands anymore.
AND OT, I don't think any religion should let you kill an endangered or threatened animal. I have a great deal of respect for tribal religion, but 'threatened' means play time is over, and it's time to stop respecting beliefs. Ecosystems tend to be pretty delicate, and I would liken the chain reaction of a destabilized ecosystem to putting large amounts of toxic chemicals out in the wild, which is illegal. I don't think america should have any more say on the fate of the eagles than any other country
|
jeune Posts: 216
Registered: 2005-5-29 13:25:11
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Should the killing of bald eagles be allowed? |
Fozzie_Bear posted:
I would think the environmentalists view it as simple math. You have 100 birds and 1000 Indians that want their feathers.
I really do not know the eagle situation in the lower 48. I just know that where I grew up eagles were kind of a nuisance... hear stories of them swooping down and taking small dog/cats. Also when you are fishing they are flying around like seagulls. But I just read Alaska has 1/2 of the worlds population of the bird so the situation may be different down here.
But it is interesting watching the relationship between Natives/environmentalists. They will ally together for certain issues (stop the tar sands/stop this giant chemical dump into a river/etc)... but then fight each other over Natives trying to development their lands to bring their people out of poverty. I think each group has different long term goals.
-----signature-----
"Whenever the white man treats the Indian as they treat each other then we shall have no more wars. We shall be all alike — brothers of one father and mother, with one sky above us and one country around us and one government for all."
|
Caledric Title: Pew! Pew! Pew!
Posts: 1,327
Registered: 2001-12-22 07:59:39
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Should the killing of bald eagles be allowed? |
Native Americans are only subject to US laws as long as it suits them... the moment something happens they don't like they cry foul and sovereign nation and demand special treatment. They are a bigger bunch of hypocritical whiners then the NAACP.
-----signature-----
Planetside 2 -- Outcasters "As One"
Marmot BR 0 (waiting for beta!)
|
Reapist Title: Official ACF HIOFI Poster
Posts: 4,367
Registered: 2001-12-20 03:56:16
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Should the killing of bald eagles be allowed? |
TheNinthSeal posted:
Reapist posted:
We already give American Indians too many rights. We gave them so the could continue to live as they always had lived, but they no longer live this way. They use modern methods to harvest fish and crabs. The live in houses instead of teepees. Many lay around and collect free money then blow it on alcohol and worse. Our biggest mistake, as a country, was to make all the concessions we did then push them off onto reservations and isolate them so they could not be absorbed. If we had let nature take its course we wouldn't have the issues we have now. It is our own fault. Any group of people will say whatever they think will work to make you give them things.
Wait and see how jeune responds here.
Come on, really? teepees weren't actually used a ton anywhere, but especially living in washington you should know, most of the tribes of the NW DID live in houses.
More to the point, I don't see why they should have to stick to their old ways to be allowed to use land that was generally bullied away from them but often just taken away. It is annoying for the united states, no question. It seems outdated and generally pointless. 'Most of them don't even use their money wisely.' There are a ton of reasons people use to talk about absorbing them. But NONE of them address the fact that it is just straight up THEIR land. That's like you stealing my house, and I manage to escape with my playstation, but years later you argue that I shouldn't have my playstation because I am not really getting good at any games, and YOU are super good at them. What makes america deserve to absorb their lands? America has far less claim to them than anyone else if it is for some reason proven that they didnt deserve their own lands anymore.
AND OT, I don't think any religion should let you kill an endangered or threatened animal. I have a great deal of respect for tribal religion, but 'threatened' means play time is over, and it's time to stop respecting beliefs. Ecosystems tend to be pretty delicate, and I would liken the chain reaction of a destabilized ecosystem to putting large amounts of toxic chemicals out in the wild, which is illegal. I don't think america should have any more say on the fate of the eagles than any other country
Look at sturgeon fishing in WA. They are a highly protected species of fish. Yet Indians are allowed to commercially harvest them. They run gill nets and bring them in like no one's business.
-----signature-----
pkhere: Jebus sometimes you make my arse tired.
Referring to illegal aliens as 'immigrants' is the same as referring to shoplifters as 'shoppers' - Dorvinion
I'd feel bad for Satriani but he got himself into it. - allmightybob_MLF
|
BritonGuy Title: Serious Business
Posts: 1,567
Registered: 2004-3-4 20:43:50
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Should the killing of bald eagles be allowed? |
Sith_Mauler posted:
BritonGuy posted:
The casino thing makes no sense whatsoever and has nothing to do with the preservation of a nation, religion, or culture. It's a racist policy to only allow Indian Americans to open them.
really are you that dense?
state governments can decide if casinos are legal or not.
The federal government upholds the racist policies of preferential casino treatment for Indians no matter what the states decide.
-----signature-----
Briton Guy...persnickety...NEVER!  -Murron (truly)
Hawkson is the greatest. -Hawkson
Britonguy is usually right. -Onslaught on BT
“Do or do not... there is no try.†- Yodazami
Do you expect me to remember what I put in my mouth? -NSMachi
|
BritonGuy Title: Serious Business
Posts: 1,567
Registered: 2004-3-4 20:43:50
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Should the killing of bald eagles be allowed? |
Reapist posted:
TheNinthSeal posted:
Reapist posted:
We already give American Indians too many rights. We gave them so the could continue to live as they always had lived, but they no longer live this way. They use modern methods to harvest fish and crabs. The live in houses instead of teepees. Many lay around and collect free money then blow it on alcohol and worse. Our biggest mistake, as a country, was to make all the concessions we did then push them off onto reservations and isolate them so they could not be absorbed. If we had let nature take its course we wouldn't have the issues we have now. It is our own fault. Any group of people will say whatever they think will work to make you give them things.
Wait and see how jeune responds here.
Come on, really? teepees weren't actually used a ton anywhere, but especially living in washington you should know, most of the tribes of the NW DID live in houses.
More to the point, I don't see why they should have to stick to their old ways to be allowed to use land that was generally bullied away from them but often just taken away. It is annoying for the united states, no question. It seems outdated and generally pointless. 'Most of them don't even use their money wisely.' There are a ton of reasons people use to talk about absorbing them. But NONE of them address the fact that it is just straight up THEIR land. That's like you stealing my house, and I manage to escape with my playstation, but years later you argue that I shouldn't have my playstation because I am not really getting good at any games, and YOU are super good at them. What makes america deserve to absorb their lands? America has far less claim to them than anyone else if it is for some reason proven that they didnt deserve their own lands anymore.
AND OT, I don't think any religion should let you kill an endangered or threatened animal. I have a great deal of respect for tribal religion, but 'threatened' means play time is over, and it's time to stop respecting beliefs. Ecosystems tend to be pretty delicate, and I would liken the chain reaction of a destabilized ecosystem to putting large amounts of toxic chemicals out in the wild, which is illegal. I don't think america should have any more say on the fate of the eagles than any other country
Look at sturgeon fishing in WA. They are a highly protected species of fish. Yet Indians are allowed to commercially harvest them. They run gill nets and bring them in like no one's business.
Sounds like a racist government enforced monopoly.
-----signature-----
Briton Guy...persnickety...NEVER! -Murron (truly)
Hawkson is the greatest. -Hawkson
Britonguy is usually right. -Onslaught on BT
“Do or do not... there is no try.†- Yodazami
Do you expect me to remember what I put in my mouth? -NSMachi
|
|
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
Should the killing of bald eagles be allowed? |
BritonGuy posted:
Sounds like a racist government enforced monopoly.
Sounds like a really poorly thought out genocide/relocation done by the american government, and now we are all paying for it and so is nature. I'm not saying they are the good guys, in examples such as the fishing one, for example. But, in my opinion, ethics are situational. Not to a massive degree, but they are. A country with a tremendous amount of other natural resources exploiting the fishing in one particular area and pushing something to extinction is pretty crappy, obviously. A tribe that had many natural resources that gets put into that same particular area with very few resources doing the same thing is quite a bit different.
I know it's a problem, that is obvious. I just don't understand how you can say finishing the job we started so long ago and taking the rest of their land is the only obvious or ethical solution. It seems like you should be more compassionate. That's just me though.
|
|
