In response to George Chebba’s letter, “Why glorify slaughter” (BDN, Oct. 4), he berates the BDN and its editors for being “dim-witted” in their rationale for “glorifying the slaughter of innocent moose, deer, and turkeys,” and also calling hunters “slaughterers.”
My question to Chebba is where does he get his pompous attitude? Apparently, Chebba is so important that the opinions, traditions, and culture of others are substandard and hence those individuals are wrong and “dim-witted.” As a hunter, apparently I am inferior to Chebba and incapable of rationalizing the “slaughter” I partake in every year I head into the woods in November.
I’ve been in the military since I graduated from high school more than two years ago, and I understand and support Chebba in exercising his right to free speech. I support him and everybody else in expressing their opinion in not agreeing with hunting. But since he disagrees with the BDN and the articles it publishes, why are the others who are exercising that same First Amendment right forced to be quiet?
Oh yes, I forgot, they are “dim-witted,” so what they think is wrong, immoral, and unimportant.
I say to Chebba, if you don’t like what the BDN prints, then don’t read it.