This does not come close to the brilliant essay, published in no less a respectable journal than the Boston Globe, in praise of tigers devouring the locals in Bangladesh. It would seem that, in light of the fact that the Bangladeshi human population was far too numerous for the regional environment, and that tigers, now strictly protected by draconian laws, were beginning to make a comeback, the writer was almost gleeful to see the ravenous beasts 'culling' the overabundant herd of people (I wish I could cite you the date and author).It is this sort of attitudes on the part of characters such as these that give the whole concept of environmentalists a bad name. Conservation was a good idea, when Theodore Roosevelt saw it as a way to preserve the vast hunting and fishing grounds of the American wilderness; it could become a rational movement again, were those same tigers to do a bit of creative 'culling' amongst these unstable twits.
There must be a way to have clean air and water, without subsequently allowing carnivores to seek prey amongst us hairless monkey types. Although, if any vegans truly desire to be eaten forthwith by wild beasts, I most certainly would defend their most inalienable rights in this regard. I would just ask them to be good sports, and allow me time to fetch my camcorder.
(Much as in the club, formed at a local Leftist Ivy-League university, whose fraternity was based on a suicide pact, to be acted upon with cyanide pills in the event of a nuclear war. To which I responded by creating my own small circle, based on a solemn pact bent on ensuring that these fearful folk might not lack for assistance in this noble task, were such an event to make fulfillment of the pact necessary. 'Twas a sacrifice on our parts, but a burden gladly taken. heh heh heh ...)
D.C.
