Whaling and Censorship

If I can go on a bit of a tangent before addressing the topic, I so sick of seeing commercials for Whale Wars oh my god. Everyone on the Steve Irwin is a giant douchebag. Like, every single one of them. It's almost like that episode of South Park where everyone was smelling their own gas, but instead of owning hybrids it's endangering human life.

On that note, these Sea Shepherds are criminals and should be treated as such. If Japan is whaling illegally (which from what I can see it probably is) it should be dealt with through legal means. Vigilante terrorism is wrong whether the victims deserve it or not.
 
Speaking of South Park, there was also an episode about the whaling controversy, in which the Japanese were considered normal after they began butchering cows and chickens rather than whales and dolphins. I honestly laugh at the people who are so pissed about whaling, and wonder why they aren't up in arms about the practices of meat facilities.

No one should fault the Japanese whalers in any way, they're just doing what they have to do to make money. People will pay through the roof for whale meat, apparently, and until that changes, no amount of rules and regulations will stop whaling.
 
mtr said:
Speaking of South Park, there was also an episode about the whaling controversy, in which the Japanese were considered normal after they began butchering cows and chickens rather than whales and dolphins. I honestly laugh at the people who are so pissed about whaling, and wonder why they aren't up in arms about the practices of meat facilities.

No one should fault the Japanese whalers in any way, they're just doing what they have to do to make money. People will pay through the roof for whale meat, apparently, and until that changes, no amount of rules and regulations will stop whaling.
Click to expand...

So is prostitution okay too, people pay through the roof for that too. People will also pay people to assassinate other people, they pay tons, is that okay?

Who says that people aren't up in arms over the practices of meat facilities, pretty much every vegetarian is...
 
mtr said:
Speaking of South Park, there was also an episode about the whaling controversy, in which the Japanese were considered normal after they began butchering cows and chickens rather than whales and dolphins. I honestly laugh at the people who are so pissed about whaling, and wonder why they aren't up in arms about the practices of meat facilities.
Click to expand...

If you're gonna use South Park to justify your views, you should be aware that there's also an episode where Stan becomes a vegetarian, and he literally turns into a giant pussy.
 
Precognition said:
For survival?

You realize that unless you're from a 3rd world country, you can still have a nutritionally-secure diet without eating meat? And it's financially reasonable too considering how expensive meat is.

Let me also tell you that it's the same rational as killing and eating small children.

Cannibalism is a taboo because you can find something less cognitive to eat so children wouldn't suffer, but can't the same thing be said about meat?

You can still attain protein, vitamin B12 and iron from mushrooms, beans, strawberries and soy.

Meat is wrong, good night.
Click to expand...

My name is Alison and I am an ANIMAL.
I'm all for those who want to be vegetarians because they believe it's healthier for them, and maybe they just don't enjoy the taste of meat, but I really can't agree with meat being "wrong." Humans are at the top of the food chain for a reason, and fuck if I'm not going to eat the lesser-creatures beneath me, if I so choose. I think that whaling is general is terrible, mostly because of their imminent extinction and the fact that it's not a necessary (whatsoever) food source for Japan, or any other country. Plus you know THEY'RE SO BIG AND BEAUTIFUL AND SMART. But that can't fly for everyone; in the end, they're still just animals, no matter how monstrous (in size) and majestic they are.

As for the killing and eating small children thing, that's just a little ridiculous. Why not just eat midgets then, too. Actually I really don't even understand what point you're trying to make here. So far as I can see, you mention it in the same vein of "lesser cognitive beings" which is our only rationale for eating meat, but, uhh? Society has regulated and characterized most of the world's eating habits to avoid cannibalism, and I'm pretty sure its only people in dire need of food/have some mental disorder that make them think for even a second that eating a child/friend of theirs is at all okay. It bothers me that you said that at all.

My grandfather hunts deer and then we make burgers out of them: pretty good deal. I think animals slaughtered for their fur is far worse than animals slaughtered for sustenance. At least in the latter, the work isn't necessarily put to a wasteful end.

also I lol'd at Dr. Attack's post.
 
Precognition said:
For survival?
Click to expand...
Yes
You realize that unless you're from a 3rd world country, you can still have a nutritionally-secure diet without eating meat? And it's financially reasonable too considering how expensive meat is.
Click to expand...
meat tastes better than the goo they had in the matrix. (I only assume this as I have not eaten it, but that one kid complained about it so I take his word)

Let me also tell you that it's the same rational as killing and eating small children.

Cannibalism is a taboo because you can find something less cognitive to eat so children wouldn't suffer, but can't the same thing be said about meat?
Click to expand...
Animals are just going to get eaten by other animals, its just about who gets there first.

You can still attain protein, vitamin B12 and iron from mushrooms, beans, strawberries and soy.
Click to expand...
All that stuff is gross except strawberries.

Meat is wrong, good night.
Click to expand...
Ok, Precognition the infallible.

Seconding Fishy's post for the most part.
 
I don't consider whaling to be immoral. "Respect" for animals, a desire to conserve rare animals and a dislike of causing "unnecessary" suffering to them are not common to all humans. It's wrong to impose the beliefs of those who'd ban whaling on those who don't see anything wrong with it.

I like cute animals. Tigers, lions, etc. However, I acknowledge that this is an irrational stance and would not impose it on anyone else. If you like tiger soup or want a lion rug, that's fine. Just because I don't agree that those things are worth a beautiful species being wiped out doesn't mean that opinion should be treated like fact.

How many of you have ever crushed a bug in your home? What about a rat? A raccoon? Where exactly is the line between which animals it is OK to consider lesser and expendable, and which animals it isn't?
 
"IT R ILEGAL LOL" is no explanation for why anything is wrong.

Since you've displayed no capacity for thought, I'm going to spare myself the tiresome task of reading your inane thoughts again by adding you to my ignore list. I recommend you return the gesture so you don't accidentally address me expecting some kind of acknowledgement.
 
Precognition said:
Crappy logic at play.
Click to expand...

I love it when people say that logic is crappy but then not explain why.

You know what I say is human and logical? Not using a toilet. Choosing to poop is barbaric. And IMMORAL, I mean, have you actually seen what happens at a waste treatment plant? It's horrifying.
 
Lelouch said:
"IT R ILEGAL LOL" is no explanation for why anything is wrong.

Since you've displayed no capacity for thought, I'm going to spare myself the tiresome task of reading your inane thoughts again by adding you to my ignore list. I recommend you return the gesture so you don't accidentally address me expecting some kind of acknowledgement.
Click to expand...

He provided a reason: whales are endangered. This does not hinge on whether or not whaling is illegal. You can disagree with this reason (as you somewhat did above) but do not pretend it is not there.
 
I don't get what is so complicated.
Whales are going extinct.
A large portion of us do not want us to seem they vanish from the face of the earth.
We take preventive measures against letting this happen.

Oh, and on the veggie thing. Do not tell me it is inhuman to eat meat. We evolved specifically to eat meat. Inhuman is consuming milk and bread.
 
@ Luduan - the reasons a law is created aren't relevant to the fact that citing something as against the law as the reason that something is immoral is pathetic.

We don't all care that extinction is very possible. To some of people, that just means they can charge more for products extracted from the species. Why should they be forced to cease operating because some people think the abstract notion of there always being whales somewhere or other supersedes a man's right to a living?
 
Attention: HUMANS ARE ABOVE EATING MEAT crowd

Why do you have wisdom teeth?
To chew through tough meats before you were able to cook/tenderize them properly.

Why do you have canines?
To eat meat.

You are supposed to eat meat. Just because you 'can' get the proper nutrients from not-meat doesn't mean you are meant to.

Not to mention have you ever had a steak? Best food ever.
 
TPM said:
Oh, and on the veggie thing. Do not tell me it is inhuman to eat meat. We evolved specifically to eat meat. Inhuman is consuming milk and bread.
Click to expand...

We didn't evolve specifically to do anything. We are capable of digesting meat. That is not justification for it.

That being said, I don't care if you eat meat. That's irrelevant to the topic, which is poaching endangered animals.

A man has no more right to living than a whale does. If one asshole wants to kill endangered whales for a living, I don't really care what his justification is for it: there ARE other things he could do.
 
Well, as OP I feel obliged to moderate my thread and introduce some new material.

As human beings, is there something sad about the idea of ceasing to exist? Would you feel that sadness if you knew you were the last of your kind, or that your lineage would cease to exist? And would you wish that on another creature, or a whole population of them, given that they are mammals like yourself and share 90%+ of your DNA?

If that doesn't bother you, consider that there's an economic value to species and diversity. At the very least, they're interesting to look at. Imagine the draw of showing off a live mammoth today. Or a blue whale in a tank. Even a dinosaur for that matter. Not to mention that some animals have medicinal purposes, or that research of them might lead to new understandings. And who knows what uses we might find in the future. For those reasons, preservation of a species has value, and the hunting of endangered species is a poor economic decision (especially because the benefits of the species' survival extends for years and years, while meat can only be eaten once). Therefore laws can be created by the international community to stop whaling, as the whole of humankind would suffer an economic loss from the species extinction (or the risk of extinction).

And does that mean we should choose the lives of whales over the livelihood of some people? Quite possibly. There's an idea of the tragedy of the commons, which is the entire community suffering a loss because an individual, or a group of individuals, overconsume and destroy a natural resource because they have an incentive to do so. Plus, might is often right in this world, and if more people oppose whaling than support it, measures can be taken to prevent whaling (overtly or covertly).
 
@ Phantom - you can't use democracy to justify everything. A bunch of "what ifs" might be interesting, but whether or not they justify one country ordering another to live by the firsts' standards is very much open to interpretation.

I don't feel "the international community" has any place to pass laws forcing Japan to comply with the whims of the rest of the world in any matter that doesn't involve basic human rights. Whether or not potential future humans have a basic right to have whales available to them is also open to interpretation.

If people in the West like whales, those people can do their best to maintain whales in captivity. In the middle of the damn ocean, they're fair game for anyone with a boat.
 
Lelouch said:
those people can do their best to maintain whales in captivity.
Click to expand...
a. Cetaceans generally do poorly in captivity. Whales especially.
b. Perhaps you would like to find the space and then fund a tank/habitat suitable for something along the lines of a blue whale?

In case you didn't realize, one blue whale is kind of big. Two to breed and maintain the whale species is even bigger.

You need a whole ocean to keep a larger species of whale.

So uh until you provide some actual alternative to letting Japan milk the whale populations don't say dumb crap like this again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top