Page 1 of 1

Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2016 7:48 pm
by Neil
Most of us are aware that PETA and HSUS use very little of the money they get in donations on aiding stray dogs and cats, almost none on shelters, despite their tear-jerking late night commercials. I tell people that want to help to give to no kill local shelters. But found the list below of interest. Particularly the position of the World Wildlife Fund as my wife is a longtime supporter.

AR Orgs

Wildlife Organizations: Positions on Hunting

Source: "What They Say About Hunting - Position Statements on Hunting of Major Conservation or Preservation Organizations" Printed by the National Shooting Sports Foundation

Special Thanks to Michael Markarian at the Fund for Animals
for providing the NSSF's publication.
*Anti, Pro, Neutral (No Position or "Neither for Nor Against")

Organization
Position*
on Hunting
Additional Comments from Statements


The American Forestry Association
1516 P Street NW
Washington DC 20005
(202) 667-3300
P
"…under proper regulations, hunting should be considered a tool of management by owners of forest and range holders…


The Wilderness Society
1400 Eye Street NW 10th Fl
Washington DC 20005
(202) 842-3400

P
"...recognizes hunting as a legitimate use in wilderness areas…subject to appropraite regulation for species protection."

The Izaak Walton League of America
1401 Wilson Blvd, Level B
Arlington, VA 22209
(703) 528-1818

P
"...believes hunting should be considered a valuable management tool, where it is compatible with other resource uses and purposes…"


The National Rifle Association of America
1600 Rhode Island Ave NW
Washington DC 20036
(202) 828-6000

P
"Well-regulated hunting is a beneficial use of renewable wildlife resources which, when left to nature, are finally lost to predators, disease, often starvation and old age…"

The Humane Society of the United States
2100 L. Street NW
Washington DC 20037
(202) 452-1100

A
"The HSUS is strongly opposed to the hunting of any living creature for fun, trophy, or for sport…The HSUS recognizes that the welfare and responsible management of animals may, on occasion, necessitate the killing of wildlife…also recognizes that the legitimate needs for human subsistence may necessitate the killing of wildlife..."


The American Humane Association
P.O. Box 1266
Denver, CO 80201-1266
(303) 695-0811

A
"…opposed to the hunting of any living creature for fun, a trophy, or for simple sport…believes that sport hunting is a form of exploitation of animals for the entertainment of the hunter... when all other avenues have been exhausted and there remains a demonstrable necessity to kill some wildlife, it should be performed by responsible officials and methods utilized must result in instantaneous and humane death...considers sport hunting a violation of the inherent integrity of animals...and calls for positive action to prevent such cruelties."


The North American Wildlife Foundation
102 Wilmot Road, Suite 410
Deerfield, IL 60015
(312) 940-7776
P
"Beneficial non-game wildlife populations and those that are threatened and endangered are given the full protection of the law. Surpluses of game populations can be cropped each year on a sustained basis under strict licensing and regulations…"

The National Audubon Society
950 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10022
(212) 546-9100

N
"…has never been opposed to the hunting of game species if that hunting is done ethically and in accordance with laws and regulations design to prevent depletion of the wildlife resource…we will advocate restrictions on hunting, include the complete closure of a hunting season, whenever we are convinced that the welfare of the species involved requires it…we do not advocate hunting. This is no contradiction, though some people seem to think it is. Our objective is wildlife and environmental conservation, not the promotion of hunting. We think lots of the justifications for hunting are weak ones, and too often exaggerated for commercial reasons, and we do not hesitate to say so when the ocassion calls for it. But this does not make us anti-hunting…"


Outdoor Writers Association of America
2017 Cato Avenue, Suite 101
State College, PA 16801
(814) 234-1011

P
"…Without a regular controlled harvest, many animal populations and the ranges they occupy would be impoverished…Further, the hunter and the angler under established seasons and bag limits, take only a portion of the annual surplus which is going to be lost to other mortality causes anyway…"


Friends of Animals, Inc.
P.O. Box 1244
Norwalk, CT 06856
(203) 866-5223

A
"The premeditated killing of wildlife is abhorrent to most people, particularly when hunting is condoned under false pretenses, under the guise of 'wildlife management, overpopulation control,' or 'protection of crops and public safety.'…We believe that wildlife, which by law belongs to all of us, has rights and deserves protection, and that the non-hunting majority needs a voice, an active advocate…"

The Wildlife Legislative Fund of America
50 West Broad Street
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 221-2684

P
"The Wildlife Legislative Fund of America believes that hunting, fishing and trapping are Rights not privileges. They are honorable pursuits that can be defended by our Constitution. These oldest of heritages are treasures that can and should be defended as we defend other legacies that weld us to our roots and remind us from where we came.
These Rights can be taken away only by breaking the laws and regulations designed to protect wildlife.

The Wildlife Legislative Fund of America is the nation's principal sportsmen's rights organization and through its associated organization represents over one million sportsmen. It is a firm believer in scientific wildlife management and supports regulated hunting, fishing and trapping.

Founded to combat the animal rights movement, the WLFA is proud to have served sportsmen for over a decade. The staff is comprised of professionals with backgrounds in the fields of public relations, legislative lobbying, natural resource management and law.

The WLFA is an association of organizations ranging from national groups like Ducks Unlimited, the Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, National Wild Turkey Foundation and others to hundreds of state and local sportsmen clubs. It provides money and manpower to sportsmen under attack anywhere in America. The WLFA operates in all 50 states and Washington, DC.

Sportsmen are America's greatest conservationists. Because of their concern for wildlife and their support of the nation's dedicated wildlife managers, America's wildlife is thriving. No species of wildlife in the United States has been endangered by modern sportsmen. On the contrary, the sportsman's concern for wildlife, backed up by $950 million annually through license fees and self-imposed taxes, is the reason wildlife is thriving. Sportsmen provide a service by harvesting surplus animals. This can be crucial for many wildlife species' populations. Scientific data collected by biologists from the sportsman's game bag provides invaluable information that wildlife managers use to formulate wildlife management plans to ensure wildlife's health and abundance.

To combat a growing anti-hunting/animal rights movement, the WLFA recently launched a nationwide public education program called "Protect What's Right". It is designed to carry the sportsmen's message to the non-hunting public. It is currently operational in hundreds of communities in 48 states."



Ducks Unlimited, Inc.
National Headquarters
One Waterfowl Way
Long Grove, IL 60047
(312) 438-4300

P
"…supports the concept of regulated sport hunting as an integral part of sound wildlife management, and as a wise and prudent use of renewable natural resources…Because DU was chartered as a conservation organization, it is not a 'hunting' organization per se. But as a part of its singleness of purpose, DU attempts to educate the public about wildlife habitat and management."

The National Wildlife Federation
1400 Sixteenth Street NW
Washington DC 20036-2266
(202) 797-6800

P
"We support hunting because, under professional regulation, wildlife populations are renewable natural resource that can safely sustain taking…the real and fundamental problem facing wildlife is not hunting but, instead is habitat degradation and destruction…"

Defenders of Wildlife
1244 Nineteenth Street NW
Washington DC 20036
(202) 659-9510

N
"…neither an anti-hunting nor a pro-hunting organization, but most of its 80,000 members are non-hunters and their concern is with the restoration and protection of all species of wildlife and their habitats…"

Wildlife Management Institute
1101 Fourteenth Street NW
Washington DC 20005
(202) 371-1808

P
"…supports and encourages recreational hunting and harvests within (1) prescribed scientific guidelines, (2) essential standards and traditions of fair chase and (3) laws and regulations established and enforced by state, provincial and federal wildlife management agencies…Hunting designated wildlife populations legally and responsibly is a legitimate, healthful and otherwise worthwhile recreational activity…"

The Wildlife Society
5410 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 200
Bethesda, MD 20814
(301) 897-9770

P
"…Today hunting is principally useful for recreational purposes, for utilization of the harvestable surplus to benefit man, and for controlling populations…"

The Fund for Animals
200 West 57 th Street
New York, NY 10019
(212) 246-2096

A
"…unalterably opposed to the recreational killing of wildlife…"

The Sierra Club
730 Polk Street
San Francisco, CA 94109
(415) 776-2211

N
"…is not opposed to sports hunting outside of appropriate sanctuaries such as national parks, provided it is regulated…Wildlife animals should not be valued principally in terms of whether they can serve as targets…we should respect the moral right of all creatures to exist, to maintain basic and successful breeding stock, to have essential habitat protected, to be free of unnecessary predation, persecution, and cruel and unduly confining captivity…regulated sports hunting may have a place for those who choose to pursue it, but there are more pressing concerns…"


World Wildlife Fund
1250 24 t h Street NW
Washington DC 20037
(202) 293-4800

N
"…the organization itself takes no position either pro or con, on hunting…WWF recognizes that responsibly conducted hunting can be an appropriate wildlife management tool, particularly for abundant game that is maintained on a sustainable basis…WWF opposes hunting which might adversely affect the survival of threatened or endangered species…"

National Shooting Sports Foundation
555 Danbury Road
Wilton, CT 06897
(203) 762-1320

P
"…Since the NSSF was created 'to foster in the American public a better understanding of and more active participation in the shooting sports,' its position on hunting as properly defined is one of strong support…believes that sport hunting is a desirable part of modern recreational patterns. NSSF feels that Americans have a right to hunt but to do so on private land is a privilege extended by the landowner. Hunting with proper controls is an effective and needed tool of that game management which has become the responsibility of modern man everywhere. It is the function of the hunting-interested to transfer their knowledge and their understanding of the hunting ethic to the younger people just as it has always been their function…No game species has been moved toward serious threat of extinction by sport hunting alone. On the contrary, numerous species have been returned to healthy numbers through hunter-sponsored, hunter-financed habitat management…"

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2016 8:07 pm
by Neil
Sorry, I tried to post a link, but couldn't.

So the above is nearly unreadable. I tried.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 5:05 am
by NEhomer
I find the liberal mindset of being anti-hunting yet pro abortion to be just about the most profound intellectual disconnect in existence.

In my home State of MA I may discard an unborn baby with no questions asked but I face a stiff fine for trapping a muskrat.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:43 am
by Mountaineer
Neil wrote:Sorry, I tried to post a link, but couldn't.

So the above is nearly unreadable. I tried.
No....it is quite clear.
Well noted.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 10:03 am
by fishvik
It is interesting that most of the pro-hunting groups are science based and the anti groups are emotion based. As a retired wildlife/fisheries professional it was also my experience that the pro groups put their donation money primarily towards habitat improvement and environmental education whereas the anti's go towards law suits. Now there are exceptions but this tended to be the rule.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 2:44 pm
by MNTonester
very interesting post and comments

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 3:17 pm
by Neil
I have a wealthy friend that used to contribute to HSUS based on their commercials before we educated him about their anti-hunting position and the miniscule amounts spent on direct animal care. Their commercials work because they show a real need, you would think honest people would try to address those needs.

This friend, not being able to find a worthy national organization, contributes to local no kill shelters and built a 100+ run kennel for dogs he personally rescued. Think what it costs him to feed and care for 100 stray dogs.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 3:19 pm
by Sharon
NEhomer wrote:I find the liberal mindset of being anti-hunting yet pro abortion to be just about the most profound intellectual disconnect in existence.

In my home State of MA I may discard an unborn baby with no questions asked but I face a stiff fine for trapping a muskrat.
Unbelievable , isn't it?

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 5:44 pm
by Grange
NEhomer wrote:I find the liberal mindset of being anti-hunting yet pro abortion to be just about the most profound intellectual disconnect in existence.

In my home State of MA I may discard an unborn baby with no questions asked but I face a stiff fine for trapping a muskrat.
As profound as an anti-abortion person being pro death penalty?

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 6:35 pm
by mnaj_springer
Grange wrote:
NEhomer wrote:I find the liberal mindset of being anti-hunting yet pro abortion to be just about the most profound intellectual disconnect in existence.

In my home State of MA I may discard an unborn baby with no questions asked but I face a stiff fine for trapping a muskrat.
As profound as an anti-abortion person being pro death penalty?
Yes, there are contradictions on both sides of the aisle (in the US, Sharon I'm not as familiar with politics in Canada).

But no one should assume that it's hipocracy without know the reasoning of others. Even saints supported autrocities for the sake of "common good" and with understanding that moral law and civil law differ. St. Thomas Aquinas is one such person.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 7:29 pm
by ezzy333
As profound as an anti-abortion person being pro death penalty?
I find no problem with this in anyway since one is severely penalizing(killing) a completely innocent person while the other is penalizing(killing) someone for a willful action(killing) they took full well knowing the consequences. Sounds to me like actions have consequences and responsibility for their actions.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 7:53 pm
by DeLo727
This is a great post, Its important for us to stay on top of this.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:59 pm
by Neil
ezzy333 wrote:
As profound as an anti-abortion person being pro death penalty?
I find no problem with this in anyway since one is severely penalizing(killing) a completely innocent person while the other is penalizing(killing) someone for a willful action(killing) they took full well knowing the consequences. Sounds to me like actions have consequences and responsibility for their actions.
Absolutely right, Ezzy. But once again we are getting off topic.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:14 pm
by Grange
ezzy333 wrote:
As profound as an anti-abortion person being pro death penalty?
I find no problem with this in anyway since one is severely penalizing(killing) a completely innocent person while the other is penalizing(killing) someone for a willful action(killing) they took full well knowing the consequences. Sounds to me like actions have consequences and responsibility for their actions.
You may not have a problem with that, but it still is a "profound intellectual disconnect".

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 10:02 pm
by Neil
Grange wrote:
ezzy333 wrote:
As profound as an anti-abortion person being pro death penalty?
I find no problem with this in anyway since one is severely penalizing(killing) a completely innocent person while the other is penalizing(killing) someone for a willful action(killing) they took full well knowing the consequences. Sounds to me like actions have consequences and responsibility for their actions.
You may not have a problem with that, but it still is a "profound intellectual disconnect".
It is only a disconnect in your biased mind. Abortion is the taking of an innocent life, one that has not sinned. Capital punishment is the extermination of a person that was judged and convicted by a jury of his peers to have committed such horendess crimes he no longer can live in society. Then is given years of appeals and review.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 12:04 am
by mnaj_springer
If one is using religion, sin, and the value of life as a foundation for an argument then you have found your disconnect.

But please... Let's get back on subject.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 1:18 am
by Neil
mnaj_springer wrote:If one is using religion, sin, and the value of life as a foundation for an argument then you have found your disconnect.

But please... Let's get back on subject.
I used only sin, not religion, nor value of a life (sin is transgression and can be against mankind, no religious connotation needed).

It is a matter of choice, and an unborn child has none. Fully connected and logical.

And since I started the thread I can hardly take it astray.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 5:10 am
by NEhomer
mnaj_springer wrote:If one is using religion, sin, and the value of life as a foundation for an argument then you have found your disconnect.

But please... Let's get back on subject.

Nobody is using any of that. Your argument is simply stupid. Maybe that's why you feel the need to play topic cop.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:23 am
by ezzy333
NEhomer wrote:
mnaj_springer wrote:If one is using religion, sin, and the value of life as a foundation for an argument then you have found your disconnect.

But please... Let's get back on subject.

Nobody is using any of that. Your argument is simply stupid. Maybe that's why you feel the need to play topic cop.
This argument is much like the climate change argument. You either agree or you suffer from a disconnect while all of the time you never hear the reason how to justify it.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 8:28 am
by mnaj_springer
NEhomer wrote:
mnaj_springer wrote:If one is using religion, sin, and the value of life as a foundation for an argument then you have found your disconnect.

But please... Let's get back on subject.

Nobody is using any of that. Your argument is simply stupid. Maybe that's why you feel the need to play topic cop.
I don't believe I said Neil or anyone else used that argument.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 10:22 am
by NEhomer
mnaj_springer wrote:
NEhomer wrote:
mnaj_springer wrote:If one is using religion, sin, and the value of life as a foundation for an argument then you have found your disconnect.

But please... Let's get back on subject.

Nobody is using any of that. Your argument is simply stupid. Maybe that's why you feel the need to play topic cop.
I don't believe I said Neil or anyone else used that argument.
Then what are you suggesting since you're the one I quoted?

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 11:18 am
by DougB
Sharon wrote:
NEhomer wrote:I find the liberal mindset of being anti-hunting yet pro abortion to be just about the most profound intellectual disconnect in existence.

In my home State of MA I may discard an unborn baby with no questions asked but I face a stiff fine for trapping a muskrat.
Unbelievable , isn't it?
I think if someone finds a fetus in a barrel on your property, you will be answering a lot of questions, probably on TV and then hiring an expensive lawyer. And I will point out that a lot of liberals hunt and shoot and vote pro-gun.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 12:50 pm
by Neil
DougB wrote:
Sharon wrote:
NEhomer wrote:I find the liberal mindset of being anti-hunting yet pro abortion to be just about the most profound intellectual disconnect in existence.

In my home State of MA I may discard an unborn baby with no questions asked but I face a stiff fine for trapping a muskrat.
Unbelievable , isn't it?
I think if someone finds a fetus in a barrel on your property, you will be answering a lot of questions, probably on TV and then hiring an expensive lawyer. And I will point out that a lot of liberals hunt and shoot and vote pro-gun.
Seriously, how can you vote pro-gun and still vote for any liberal presidential candidate in the last 30 years? That is a disconnect. Our President just restricted your right to sell your guns, thus cutting their value in half while raising the cost of any gun you want to buy.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 3:05 pm
by mnaj_springer
I'm suggesting that one either values all human life, no human life, or creates contradicting view points for whatever purpose it serves the creator.

Maybe it would help you, NEHomer, to know my views. I value all human life, unborn child to convicted criminal, and believe none should be taken unless as a last resort in self-defense. I believe life has been given to us by a power greater than us, and no human has the right to take that life away, especially considering how astronomically short our existence is/has been. That being said, I think defunding clinics like Planned Parenthood (which provides MANY SERVICES) and eliminating legal abortion would lead to more harm than good. Rather, if we want to stop abortion we should provide support and services for young and unmarried mothers to help with pregnancy, birth, and child rearing, without judgment or patronizing them.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 5:52 pm
by Grange
Neil wrote:
It is only a disconnect in your biased mind. Abortion is the taking of an innocent life, one that has not sinned. Capital punishment is the extermination of a person that was judged and convicted by a jury of his peers to have committed such horendess crimes he no longer can live in society. Then is given years of appeals and review.
No bias needed to be a disconnect. What you are saying is it's not OK to an unborn baby, but can be acceptable to kill that same person after they are born. You use sin (aka religious beliefs) as your justification. If there is bias it squarely on you.
I used only sin, not religion, nor value of a life (sin is transgression and can be against mankind, no religious connotation needed).
Sin is synonymous with religious beliefs and religion. You can't legitimately separate the two. Where in law that governs the transgressions you are talking about mention sin?

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 6:07 pm
by Neil
Grange,

You cannot be that dense to totally misunderstand my intent, but I will try again:

An unborn child has done nothing, good or bad. Someone convicted of a capital crime had free will and violated the law of society. Some people cannot be allowed free, and I am against life in prison for murderers.

Definition of sin in the context I used it means a moral wrong, I am telling you I did not mean it in a religious sense.
sin1
sin/
noun
1.
an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.
"a sin in the eyes of God"
synonyms: immoral act, wrong, wrongdoing, act of evil/wickedness, transgression, crime, offense, misdeed, misdemeanor; archaictrespass
"a sin in the eyes of God"
wickedness, wrongdoing, wrong, evil, evildoing, sinfulness, immorality, iniquity, vice, crime
"the human capacity for sin"
verb
1.
commit a sin.
"I sinned and brought shame down on us"
synonyms: commit a sin, commit an offense, transgress, do wrong, commit a crime, break the law, misbehave, go astray; archaictrespass
"I have sinned"

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 6:22 pm
by Grange
I understand your intent, but it is still a disconnect.

As far as the definition of sin. Read your definition or pick another one. It not only mentions God multiple times it also mentions "divine" law. You are really stretching if you think sin does not have a religious connotation.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 6:31 pm
by Neil
Crap, your debating skills need work.

There is no question many of the definitions of sin involve God and religion, but many do not. Like many words it has multiple meanings. I have clarified my meaning, and it is supported by any dictionary.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:10 pm
by Grange
Not buying it. You mentioned the word with abortion. What's next you going to say being anti-abortion has nothing to do with religion or religious beliefs?

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:51 pm
by ezzy333
Grange wrote:I understand your intent, but it is still a disconnect.

As far as the definition of sin. Read your definition or pick another one. It not only mentions God multiple times it also mentions "divine" law. You are really stretching if you think sin does not have a religious connotation.
"Oh MY God" has a religious connotation also but it is used in other venues. What a silly argument when the person using it tells you how he meant it and then you and several others spend the time to tell him he is wrong. I'll put my money on the person using a term and not the ones that just heard it.

Now back to the subject or we can just close this since it is serving no useful purpose at present.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:53 pm
by ezzy333
Grange wrote:I understand your intent, but it is still a disconnect.

As far as the definition of sin. Read your definition or pick another one. It not only mentions God multiple times it also mentions "divine" law. You are really stretching if you think sin does not have a religious connotation.
"Oh MY God" has a religious connotation also but it is used in other venues. What a silly argument when the person using it tells you how he meant it and then you and several others spend the time to tell him he is wrong. I'll put my money on the person using a term and not the ones that just heard it.

Now back to the subject or we can just close this since it is serving no useful purpose at present.

Re: Pro-Hunting Animal Welfare Groups

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 8:34 pm
by mnaj_springer
ezzy333 wrote:
Grange wrote:I understand your intent, but it is still a disconnect.

As far as the definition of sin. Read your definition or pick another one. It not only mentions God multiple times it also mentions "divine" law. You are really stretching if you think sin does not have a religious connotation.
"Oh MY God" has a religious connotation also but it is used in other venues. What a silly argument when the person using it tells you how he meant it and then you and several others spend the time to tell him he is wrong. I'll put my money on the person using a term and not the ones that just heard it.

Now back to the subject or we can just close this since it is serving no useful purpose at present.
Which "several others" were telling Neil he wrongly used the word "sin?" Just out of curiosity. Or was this hyperbole to make a point?