My very young grandson and I were talking. He mentioned that shoes were leather, but that people ate cows. Then he asked I’d people ate minks. I said no. He gave me one of those “humans are disgusting looks” only little kids can manage, and said, “That’s just not right!” I have a very wise grandson. (To explain, his thought process was that if you don’t use the whole animal…and kill just for fur…well…you get the idea.)
“WHAT ON EARTH does a discussion of storm water runoff regulations have to do with a guy wearing a fur thing around his head, that, as the punchline of the cartoon, turns out to be alive?”.Quite simple.The initial frames dealt with the desire of many to forbid others to freely act as they wish even if their actions don’t hurt othersThey would outlaw natural furs or gay marriage because they believe others shouldn’t do such things..The response wasn’t to the concept of minding your own business, but an example where the actions of others are our business because they might poison us one way or another..Interestingly, the first had nothing to do with government regulation because they have no government in BC.Still, it was a commentary on the desire to force others to comply, and she is quite capable of enforcing her will.The final frame was interesting in that the evil she thought had been done, killing of something other than a snake, actually had NOT been done. It was still alive.
Personally, I believe it would be wrong to tell Eskimos they couldn’t use furs to avoid freezing or that they had to move to warmer climes.(Nobody was talking Eskimos, but the idea of fur being bad is a natural basis for that action.)
hariseldon59 over 9 years ago
“It’s a living!”
jbmlaw01 over 9 years ago
I have only contempt for those who oppose freedom, who impose government on every decision of life. They make it worse for all.
nosirrom over 9 years ago
Could be a dicey situation if he was wearing a real live mink loin cloth.
jtviper7 over 9 years ago
Might be a good idea to get a pair of windshield wipers for his glasses.
ladylagomorph76 over 9 years ago
My very young grandson and I were talking. He mentioned that shoes were leather, but that people ate cows. Then he asked I’d people ate minks. I said no. He gave me one of those “humans are disgusting looks” only little kids can manage, and said, “That’s just not right!” I have a very wise grandson. (To explain, his thought process was that if you don’t use the whole animal…and kill just for fur…well…you get the idea.)
David Huie Green AmericaIsGreatItHasUs over 9 years ago
“WHAT ON EARTH does a discussion of storm water runoff regulations have to do with a guy wearing a fur thing around his head, that, as the punchline of the cartoon, turns out to be alive?”.Quite simple.The initial frames dealt with the desire of many to forbid others to freely act as they wish even if their actions don’t hurt othersThey would outlaw natural furs or gay marriage because they believe others shouldn’t do such things..The response wasn’t to the concept of minding your own business, but an example where the actions of others are our business because they might poison us one way or another..Interestingly, the first had nothing to do with government regulation because they have no government in BC.Still, it was a commentary on the desire to force others to comply, and she is quite capable of enforcing her will.The final frame was interesting in that the evil she thought had been done, killing of something other than a snake, actually had NOT been done. It was still alive.
David Huie Green AmericaIsGreatItHasUs over 9 years ago
Personally, I believe it would be wrong to tell Eskimos they couldn’t use furs to avoid freezing or that they had to move to warmer climes.(Nobody was talking Eskimos, but the idea of fur being bad is a natural basis for that action.)
Hunter7 over 9 years ago
Has Clumsy asked the mink to remove his scent glands? You know, those very stinky scent glands – that spray over everything and everyone. .. ;)