In truth, we never really had a choice, Ian, but overall it was a good 23 years. That one has to admit.

Actually no. Medieval Europeans ate birds because they couldn’t afford to kill cattle since they used them for milk/shearing.

This was never a problem in the New World, the birth place of the ranch.

Possibly, but come election time there will be one more reason for me to feel guilty about voting PN and yet I won’t have a choice.

I agree that respect for life should be our focal point of the decision which way to vote in the referendum.

So many species have been wantonly destroyed because that respect for life has been lost.

The worst aspect of this loss is that humans seem to be gradually losing respect even for their own species.

The fate of the American buffalo is a good lesson on the need for conservation. Just 200 years ago the land reverberated with the thunder of the animals’ hooves. The numbers fell so rapidly because of people shooting them from trains for sport and hunting them indiscriminately that Americans sought to reverse the trend with the help of the European bison. And Yellowstone National Park had to import the wolf from Europe to restock its native packs.

Ian, look at it from this point of view.

By sacrificing his vote, Busuttil removed the political element tied to the referendum giving the ‘No’ vote a better chance of winning.

I truly believe these two have an agreement to publicly disagree on the hottest current issues in order to keep themselves (as a couple) strongly favoured by at least half the population at any one time.

The passenger pigeon, the great auk, the wooly mammoth and possibly most famously, the dodo are just a few examples.

At the time these species were hunted to extinction humans were more ignorant and just couldn’t understand the severity and consequences of their actions.

The fact that in 2015, Simon Busuttil cannot grasp this and thinks it is more important to be consistent, as he put it, is ridiculous. We expected no less from Joseph Muscat, but then that’s the audience he plays to. From Simon Busuttil it was just so disappointing.

Your statement is inaccurate.

[Daphne – Do carry on defending the indefensible. I wonder just how far you’ll go.]

Deep down I strongly feel the issue is much more profound that it originally appears to be.

The issue is not ‘shout’ versus ‘shoot’ it isn’t even about ‘yes’ versus ‘no’.

In reality it’s all about life, the preservation and the sustainment of that life versus death.

The referendum is all about avoiding the killing, the death and the extermination of a bird, a flock and ultimately a species.