Thank you for your post. I should have known from
your usually eloquent posts that you are Southern.
I think I may be on the sensitive side of being
Southern. Maybe this comes from being married to
a (dare I say it?) Yankee. :-)
I don't suggest that we Southerners forget our past,
but it is our 'past history' and we have moved
forward. I do believe we have learned from it.
Unfortunately, there will always be people who
haven't learned from it, and I've met a few.
And they are not always from the South.
Ignorance, on many levels, knows no State lines.
I also don't believe that because 'Southerners hunt'
that they would easily cross-over into taking human
lives. Until this century, people have been hunting
and killing for thousands of years for food. Why
would they all of a sudden start killing people?
That doesn't make sense. A responsible hunter
would teach his child the respect and responsibility
that comes with hunting.
As far as the killings in Arkansas are concerned,
I don't believe that diet was the factor. I think
the factor is that these boys have had serious
problems from early on, most likely stemming from
their home lives.
I believe that children need firm and loving guide-
lines from their parents as well as a deep founded
respect and a healthy fear for authority figures
such as, first and foremost, God, their parents,
school teachers, etc., etc. You get the picture.
The diet factor, as Ed argues, is a good argument,
but I just can't believe that that is 'usually'
the case. If that were true, people would be
killing each other left and right. This blood type
diet is still very new and even people who have
been instinctively following the diet could not have
been following it 100%. So would that make them
violent? I don't believe so.
Rick, sorry this post is a little long-winded, but
I wanted to respond to you as well as put in my
2 cents worth on the diet/behavior theory.