Ken Fortenberry wrote:
rw wrote:

Larry L wrote:

Check out the Dilbert cartoon in your Sunday paper .... should we be
offended ? amused ? both? neither ?


It's blasphemy! These cartoonists are going too far! We should march
to Scott Adams' estate and burn down his house. I declare a fatwa! :-)


Scott Adams is a dweeby nerd, or perhaps a nerdy dweeb,
in either case he's not worth the time it takes to give
his cartoons a second thought. Take your first thought
and go with it. When I read Sunday's cartoon my first
thought was "What an ignorant idiot."


On the other hand, he has a point. I think that people who take a moral
stance against C&R fishing can have a respectable point of view, just as
I think that many honest pro-life proponents have one. We are, after
all, hurting the fish for our pleasure. That's what they object to. Even
if we don't get gratification in the actually HURTING the fish, we still
inflict it. This is troublesome to some well intentioned people.

Where I part company from the anti-C&R people are my beliefs (1) that
sport fishing (C&R and otherwise) is the strongest force for
conservation and restoration of fish and fish habitat, and (2) I,
personally, don't particularly care how much discomfort a fish on the
end of my line experiences, as long as it isn't gratuitous. It's just a
fish.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.