PDA

View Full Version : Prince Charles sparks uproar over fox hunting and gays and blacks


VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Sep 24th, 2002, 11:07 PM
taken from: http://www.advocate.com/new_news.asp?ID=6331&sd=09/24/02

Prince Charles, who has reportedly threatened to leave the United Kingdom if the sport of fox hunting is banned there, is now said to have quoted remarks made to him by a Cumbria County farmer on the issue: "If we, as a group, were black or gay, we would not be victimized or picked upon." The prince apparently said he agreed with the statement, according to The [London] Mail on Sunday. The newspaper also said that an unidentified senior politician had claimed to have heard the prince on some unspecified date threaten to emigrate if hunting were stopped.

Tony Banks, a Labor Party candidate for London mayor and a prominent animal welfare campaigner, said the reported comments are offensive to true minority groups. "If this is true--and no one knows whether it is true or not--I think quite a lot of people will find it both invidious and offensive to talk about minorities, whether they are ethnic minorities or minorities based on sexual orientation, and to compare that with a minority of people who want to carry on ripping wild animals to pieces," Banks said. Charles's comments were reported on the day that more than 400,000 farmers, gamekeepers, hunting enthusiasts, and rural residents gathered in London for a rally in support of fox hunting and their rural way of life.

DutchieGirl
Sep 25th, 2002, 02:04 AM
lol how would he know what it's like to be black or gay... as far as I know he's neither, and he wouldn't know if they were picked on or what happened to them!

Beat
Sep 25th, 2002, 08:10 AM
but ... which country would take charlie boy? :p

Dawn Marie
Sep 25th, 2002, 08:19 AM
Am I supposed to be surprised by the IGNORANCE of Prince Charles? The guy hasn't worked an honest day in his life, and has been sheltered from the real world since birth.

It's not like I am surprised by this IGNORANCE or anything. He's a walking "Bore". An UGLY walking "bore", infact I feel quite sad for him. Imagine living in a world but not knowing a damn thing about it.

The Crow
Sep 25th, 2002, 08:38 AM
Typical royalty :rolleyes:

Princess Fiona
Sep 25th, 2002, 08:40 AM
Hope he leaves, and takes the rest of his wretched family with him. Good riddance!! :fiery:

Jay
Sep 25th, 2002, 09:01 AM
I'm surprised Charlie would make comments such as those, his dad yes, he's always opening his mouth and dropping himself in the shit !

BasicTennis
Sep 25th, 2002, 10:03 AM
He should live in Afghanistan and hunt Osama Bin Laden, et. al.

The Vampiress
Sep 25th, 2002, 10:12 AM
unfortunately most people that live in the commonwealth and are somehow related to royal family wouldn't really mind what he said.

Foxes are like Badgers, there is to many of them;) Without hunting they would populate like a common bunny:) and plus they devastate alot of forest, kill animals, and are cunning. :(

Apart from having them is pets, they are a nuisance, but it's an old historical animal. :D

I think that it's allright to hunt them, but not over hunting. keep the numbers at a respectable number, and let the tradition of minks, furcoats and animal food live on:D

I bet this was from the mirror (english newspaper) well be wary of it, it has a long repuatation of exaggerating the truth. So I wouldn't be all worried if what he said was stretched beyong the truth :)

The Crow
Sep 25th, 2002, 10:26 AM
Uhm, Allegra, I agree that hunting should not be forbidden whatsoever (for the reasons you said, overpopulation and so on). However I can't understand people considering this a sport (I'm not even gonna start over the comparing with gays or black people or ...), or doing this for fun. The same with fishing actually, I don't understand how people can do that as a hobby :confused:

The Vampiress
Sep 25th, 2002, 10:55 AM
Hi Crow ;)

The Sport of Fox Hunting has been arround since Medi-Evil times, where gothics, royals used to use fox blood as makeup and to drink.

Of course you could say Fox Hunting is not a sport, but then you could say Fishing is not a sport (you catch an animal and later kill it) You could say Deer Hunting is not a sport as well with other game sports ie: mountain goats and other various types of mountain animals, so they hunt foxes in England, same in norway where we kill seals for various uses, same thing,

People have gotten used to the game, it maybe not a sport in such ways, ie timing, lengths, but its how much foxes you can kill with your foxhound (dog)

It's a sport under "game" and I think Its a game that the nation enjoys to play ans should be preserved for the future generations of younger britians. after all its history ;)

Sam L
Sep 25th, 2002, 10:58 AM
Originally posted by Allegra
there is to many of them;) Without hunting they would populate like a common bunny:) and plus they devastate alot of forest, kill animals, and are cunning. :(


Um same thing can be said of humans :eek:

Anyway, Charles is nothing but a redneck, homophobic, racist, elitist shit that came out of the British establishment. I'm not surprised and can't wait till these inbreds are eliminated.

The Vampiress
Sep 25th, 2002, 11:03 AM
but samL:) when you refer to humans you are referring to a vital rescourse of the world,

without humans this world would not evolve there are other things that could be said, but I don't think we will go into as likley people are likley to go of the subject. Foxes don't need to be populous, they need a good quota

Originally posted by Allegra
there is to many of them Without hunting they would populate like a common bunny and plus they devastate alot of forest, kill animals, and are cunning.

There are also terms that differentiate us from a common pest and a human-being.:)

The Crow
Sep 25th, 2002, 11:05 AM
Allegra, the history thing bothers me. It's not because it's history that it's good (quite the contrary I would say). I agree that all the things you say are equal (fishing, fox hunting, seal hunting, ...). And I don't care about the term "sport" (or how you wanna call it), what bothers me is that people do this for fun, for some sort of entertainment.

Sam L
Sep 25th, 2002, 11:09 AM
Just exactly what do you mean by without humans this world would not evolve? :confused: Or do you mean it wouldn't develop. There's a difference.

"There are also terms that differentiate us from a common pest and a human-being."

---> That's defined by us as humans. To think we're any special than the next species is like to believe the Earth is the centre of the universe. It really is the same kind of thinking. Unless you're a religious or spiritual person of course.

ANYWAY! My original point is that your original excuse is NOT a reason to kill a single fox. Not even one.

The Vampiress
Sep 25th, 2002, 11:11 AM
I find Fishing Fun:)

I agree with you:)
I think when the kill the fox they are not necessicerly having fun, but when they hold up the cup, sell the fur, sell the blood, send it to the taxidermist to show it of, then it would be fun. It's just how the game of fox hunting has evolved, like the game of golf, you are quiet when someone tees of, or soccer you are loud and boisterous by the sporting moral.:)

And the sporting moral for fox hunting is having fun :)

The Vampiress
Sep 25th, 2002, 11:16 AM
Sam L Fox Hunting is like an English past time, through centuries and deckades its been a part of english heritage (and Royal aristrocrats like Charles often enjoy the game) I don't think you, me. or anyone is going to break such a tradition.

The fox is a national pest like the rabbit, and possum in Norway, we feel relieved when one of these is knocked to the ground. like the english feel relieved

The Vampiress
Sep 25th, 2002, 11:18 AM
The english know completley that wiping out the fox would be devastating for their tradition, so thats why they keep them at an acceptable number every year to hunt, so next time they breed have more pups and they can be hunted.

Princess Fiona
Sep 25th, 2002, 02:33 PM
I'm sorry, but how can anyone consider the pursuit of a terrified animal by a pack of dogs "fun"? :confused: Fox hunting is nothing short of barbaric... Okay, so the numbers have to be kept down (and I don't claim to be an expert in this department), but to turn this into some form of "entertainment"? :eek: To be preserved by "tradition"? :eek: I'm sorry, I am COMPLETELY lost here...

Beat
Sep 25th, 2002, 03:42 PM
allegra, nobody disputes that hunting is necessary. but it's the way it's done that is so very sickening. and "tradition" is never ever a good argument.

Halardfan
Sep 25th, 2002, 03:44 PM
A large majority of Brits want fox hunting banned, a vast majority in parliament want it banned...only what's left of the House of Lords has kept it...hopefully soon it will be gone, though the Conservatives have promised to try to bring it back should it be gotten rid of.

Hunting is cruel and sadistic simple as that...traditional it may be but it is a cruel tradition which has no place in the 21st century.

The assembled yokels and cretins on the countryside march have been treated too well for too long. They threaten civil war if hunting is banned...bring it on!

As for Charles and royalty...its long been time to be rid of them, let them all go away, just go away.

The Guardian did a piece showing how foolish Charles' comments are...and what support the various groupings get from government...

Ethnic minorities (about 4m)

What they get:

· One quango, the commission for racial equality, budget £17m

· Special grants under the Home Office equalities programme, about £11m

· Special assistance to black and ethnic minority voluntary organisations and non profit housing groups (£100m?)

· Recognition in grant distribution formula for schools, council services, GPs and hospitals (up to £250/£300 a head?)

Extra spending: £1bn?



Rural population (8-10m)

What they get:

· About two thirds of one department of government, Defra (budget £3bn a year by 2006) and considerable interest from another, the Office of Deputy Prime Minister

· Support from specialist quangos such as the forestry commission, countryside agency

· Main beneficiaries from flood and coastal defences (£100m?)

Specific subsidies and tax reliefs:

· Farming: Payments under the common agricultural policy worth in total about £5.75bn a year, providing 40% of weekly farm income regardless of amount produced. This works out at around £150,000 a farm; special provision of £500m for "sustainable farming" over three years 2003-2006, about £16,000a farm; rate reliefs worth up to 100% of land and buildings

Low rate of duty (3.13p a litre) on red diesel for tractors vs 51.82p a litre on ordinary diesel

· Rural communities: Rate reliefs for stores, garages and pubs

Village schools and services get "sparsity factor" worth £330,000 a year

Extra spending: £7.5bn?




Gay population (5-6m)

What they get:

· Small fraction of one quango: equal opportunities commission

· Some grants to specialist voluntary oganisations dealing with Aids

· No recognition in grant distribution formulae for councils or health

Extra spending: Insignificant

veryborednow
Sep 25th, 2002, 03:58 PM
Foxhunting should not be banned until:

- there is a suitable was of reducing foxes on farms.
- this generation of hounds have died naturally
- the countryside economy picks up to the point that people
- losing their jobs through the banning can easily get one without being forced into the towns

Drag racing is the healthiest alternative, but it'll never be banned. Are the police of this country going to arrest 400,000 people who go hunting who will continue to go hunting after its banning? I don't think so

Princess Fiona
Sep 25th, 2002, 04:08 PM
Interesting statistics, Chris! :) And again, if you're going to use "tradition" as an argument, why not bring back all the vile anachronistic "sports" such as dog hunting, badger baiting etc? The FIRST political party to ban hunting is guaranteed my vote!!

Sooo, THAT many people partake in hunting in the UK? If that's the case, I think I should consider emigration... :rolleyes:

TheBoiledEgg
Sep 25th, 2002, 04:14 PM
There are too many Royals;;
My Proposal:

i think they should be set after by 100,000 Lunatics (or Leeds fans) to see how many survive.

thats the only way we will be able to control the royal population

that idea will also work for the lords and other posh snobs too.

veryborednow
Sep 25th, 2002, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Franziska
ISooo, THAT many people partake in hunting in the UK? If that's the case, I think I should consider emigration... :rolleyes:

Well, there are more than you'd expect, and you'd get all the sympathisers out.

Double Fault
Sep 25th, 2002, 08:11 PM
Charlie should book himself a ticket out of the country. A ONE WAY ticket. He should be grateful for the life of GRACE AND FAVOUR that he's enjoyed all his life. Now he wants to leave? Piss off then!

Jay
Sep 25th, 2002, 08:20 PM
Originally posted by veryborednow

Drag racing is the healthiest alternative

erm :confused:

I don't follow, I used to drag race and circuit race and I can't see the connection between drag racing and fox hunting.

And if they do ban fox hunting I certainly can't see Charles sitting behind the wheel of a 0-300mph top fuel dragster as an 'alternative' :p

veryborednow
Sep 25th, 2002, 08:27 PM
sorry :o drag hunting, oops. *cough* some kind of weird freudian slip there...

where they use the scent of a fox to chase instead of an actual fox. Means no foxes are involved bu the "sport" of the hunt can still continue.

Princess Fiona
Sep 25th, 2002, 09:02 PM
I'm sorry... I still can't comprehend how people can partake in/sympathise with something so utterly, utterly cruel...

And why has Charles got so much influence, anyway? Grrr!! :mad: Why should his views be given so much credence because he was born into a life of privilege? I'll never understand the monarchist stance, ever...

Maybe I am starting to go off topic here...

Beat
Sep 25th, 2002, 09:38 PM
Originally posted by TheBoiledEgg
There are too many Royals;;
My Proposal:

i think they should be set after by 100,000 Lunatics (or Leeds fans) to see how many survive.

thats the only way we will be able to control the royal population

that idea will also work for the lords and other posh snobs too.



:D :D :D

Jay
Sep 25th, 2002, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by veryborednow
sorry :o drag hunting, oops. *cough* some kind of weird freudian slip there...

where they use the scent of a fox to chase instead of an actual fox. Means no foxes are involved bu the "sport" of the hunt can still continue.

ahh

thanks for the explanation

although I should have known that :o cos many years ago I worked for a stable in Newmarket and they had a couple of hunter steeplechasers (they were shit though, they weren't fast enough to catch a cold never mind a fox)

still it was a nice mental image of Charles being propelled down the drag strip at 300 miles per hour :p

Halardfan
Sep 26th, 2002, 12:41 AM
What the countryside march should re-enforce is that as much as we criticize Blair, often rightly...there are people waiting in the wings who are far worse. The Tories would be worse in every single way.

In the US many people became too cynical and believed there was no difference between the main parties...and they ended up with GW...

Our disappointment at Blair shouldn't ever cloud how much worse ID Smith would be...he and his countryside cronies in charge, can you imagine?

disposablehero
Sep 26th, 2002, 01:52 AM
Originally posted by VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
taken from: http://www.advocate.com/new_news.asp?ID=6331&sd=09/24/02

Prince Charles, who has reportedly threatened to leave the United Kingdom if the sport of fox hunting is banned there

I couldn't possibly think of a better reason for banning it.

Sam L
Sep 26th, 2002, 10:54 AM
Chris Ba, thanks for the statistics.

Oh well, such is life :rolleyes:

I sense the majority of younger people in Britain do not like the monarchy and old traditions anyway.

I expect in a couple of generations they would disappear for good.