Dragon
Distinguished Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2006
- Messages
- 3,133
- Reaction score
- 50
I like whales. (eating them, that is).
It seems anti-whaling is based on 2 main points:
- they are intelligent
- they are near extinct
- Intelligence argument: If you claim that you should not eat intelligent life (whatever that is), then you must also be against eating things like pork, for example. You must also show that there is some special intelligence hierarchy, then draw a line to determine the dumb animals that you are allowed to eat.
- Extinct argument: There are some whale species that are probably near extinct, but others that are not. Regulation would easily solve this. Also, the extinction argument should be spread out over other fish as well. For example, all over the world (including the U.S., and the west) some argue we are starting to fish tuna to extinction. Actually there are numerous fish besides whale that people should be worried about in terms of the extinction argument, because there are not really any regulations. Whale is already regulated to certain degree, so there is not much to worry about anymore in terms of extinction. Japan is all for regulation of whaling and other species as well, but I think other anti-whaling countries may be against whaling regulation, because it will spill over to other species which they are fishing to oblivion. Obviously those fish are not as cute, intelligent, and there is a very good reason to continue fishing them.
2 more points that are frequently brought up by people who have no idea are:
- they are cute
- there is no reason for the Japanese to continue whaling anymore
Those are both very subjective arguments. Surprisingly a large percentage of anti-whalers bring up these points frequently, but I am sure they would be the most vocal if the tables were turned. Basically they are arguing that a small group of people from a specific culture (their`s of course) should determine what the whole world should eat. I guess they think their opinion/culture is superior and should be the one to make this determination, but what if they are not the deciding culture?
It seems anti-whaling is based on 2 main points:
- they are intelligent
- they are near extinct
- Intelligence argument: If you claim that you should not eat intelligent life (whatever that is), then you must also be against eating things like pork, for example. You must also show that there is some special intelligence hierarchy, then draw a line to determine the dumb animals that you are allowed to eat.
- Extinct argument: There are some whale species that are probably near extinct, but others that are not. Regulation would easily solve this. Also, the extinction argument should be spread out over other fish as well. For example, all over the world (including the U.S., and the west) some argue we are starting to fish tuna to extinction. Actually there are numerous fish besides whale that people should be worried about in terms of the extinction argument, because there are not really any regulations. Whale is already regulated to certain degree, so there is not much to worry about anymore in terms of extinction. Japan is all for regulation of whaling and other species as well, but I think other anti-whaling countries may be against whaling regulation, because it will spill over to other species which they are fishing to oblivion. Obviously those fish are not as cute, intelligent, and there is a very good reason to continue fishing them.
2 more points that are frequently brought up by people who have no idea are:
- they are cute
- there is no reason for the Japanese to continue whaling anymore
Those are both very subjective arguments. Surprisingly a large percentage of anti-whalers bring up these points frequently, but I am sure they would be the most vocal if the tables were turned. Basically they are arguing that a small group of people from a specific culture (their`s of course) should determine what the whole world should eat. I guess they think their opinion/culture is superior and should be the one to make this determination, but what if they are not the deciding culture?