Doubting Didymus

Nor can I, but seraphims point is now made. Any further discussion of vegetarianism specifically would be off topic, no?

Precisely. I am trying to point out to seraphim that this is not the place for a vegetarianism discussion. To object to whaling because one considers all meat eating wrong in this quite specific thread would be like getting involved in a homosexuality thread and taking the position that all sex is wrong. Its is a separate issue to the specific morality topic at hand.

monkey mind

Has anybody here defended whaling? It seems everyone is coming up with arguments against but no one for.

I tried to think of a way to defend the whaling, but I just can't. Maybe I'm too biased. I think the argument that it is a part of the long history and culture is really weak. Also, to say "we can eat whale because you eat ____" is really nothing but a guilt trip sort of justification to me.

One argument against it that I like is someone here mentioned (don't remember who) that the whales roam about free all over the world. Whereas cows tend to be fenced in their own country. What if ever country on the ocean killed whales? Japan would have a little competition, it might not be so easy for them to get their whale meat. Therefore I have no problem with the international community telling them they can't hunt whales. I agree with the ban, and don't think it should be lifted.

Also, they're excuse for killing whales right now while they are banned from doing so sounds pretty fishy and that should be investigated. If need be, we should take away the their boats until they can learn to play fair in the ocean.

Seraphim

"... To object to whaling because one considers all meat eating wrong in this quite specific thread would be like getting involved in a homosexuality thread and taking the position that all sex is wrong. Its is a separate issue to the specific morality topic at hand. "

My reply : You know something... This so-called discussion become a very fine example of morale and rational point of view of you guys ...

You guys come along with some topic to show how intelligent you are, but when someone beat you in your own game, it is time to call in the word-games. This is not in this technical term, so shouldn't be discuss here, or this is that technical term so shouldn't be proper to be discussed there either. Arrogant, self-centred and very ignorant ...

When you post this link in the 1st page,

<a href="http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0104/feature3/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0104/feature3/index.html</a>

what were you expecting people to see? How freaky humane are some of the humans are in some freaky side of the planet? You expecting someone else to come and feel sad for the way the whales been killed off?

When you post this link in the 1st post,
<a href="http://www.enn.com/news/wire-stories/2001/08/08082001/ap_whaling_44590.asp" target="_blank">http://www.enn.com/news/wire-stories/2001/08/08082001/ap_whaling_44590.asp</a>

what were you expecting? That others should be anger at Japan for doing this under cover of research?

Either way, I have stated my opinion and it is your choice whether to answer or not, since I probably won't answer back.

Doubting Didymus

Seraphim, I don't want to insult you, but I seriously don't understand your last post. I just think that the morality of whaling is a separate issue to vegetarianism as a whole. Could you make your point a lillte clearer?

Seraphim

"Seraphim, I don't want to insult you, but I seriously don't understand your last post. I just think that the morality of whaling is a separate issue to vegetarianism as a whole. Could you make your point a lillte clearer? "

My reply : How come you don't understand a simple statement as that? I asked you what was your expectations from others when you pasted that links?

And mind telling me WHY you think that whaling shouldn't be part of vegetarianism issue at whole? Whale meat end up in someone's dinner table - that's a big fact.

By denying this fact, you are denying the very foundation of which this thread need to exist. Why should anyone needs to bother talk about how some mute, dump species (as some of you seems to describe whale) dies in hand of human?
Why should National Geography or some organization such as Green Peace should bother about this animals?

Sake of Morale? BS.
To show off our (human's) of humane qualities? No one watching and no one cares.
To preseve for future generation? BS, my children have better things to do that watch poor, helpless animal getting gored inside out.

This is as simple as you get, still don't understand ... (edited by moderator to remove insults).

[ November 14, 2002: Message edited by: Seraphim ]

[ November 15, 2002: Message edited by: The Other Michael ]</p>

Primal

I believe there is a big difference between slaughtering cattle and whaling. Those who inist "no way, killing an animal is killing an animal" are being simplistic. That's like saying if we found an intelligent group of aliens living in a tribal society, we must either A) Grant all animals, including rats full rights...including voting rights. or B) Say its ok to use the newly discovered aliens for lab expirimentation and food.

Hunting I believe is less humane then domesticated slughtering for these reasons:

Reasons for eating domestic animals via slaughtering vs hunting:

1) Domestic animals like cows have been through almost 6000 years of artificial selection, to become, bigger,dumber,meatier,more docile meat containers. They are almost wholly dependent on human beings.

Whales on the other hand are intelligent,complex,wild creatures vital to the ocan's food chain.

2) Slaughtering controls for populations. It is also killing in an organized/efficient/painless manner. Farmers make sure enough cows are bred to replace the ones slaughtered. Hunting has no such measures, it is every man for himself. The goal of farming is to manage the animals. The goal of hunting is to simply kill as much as you can as fast as you can before the other guy does...waiting for whale populations to bounce up is bad for business.

3) Methods of killing. For cow butchers it a nail to the head, rather painless. For whale hunters it am explosive harpoon to the side.

4) We know plenty about cow populations, still very little about how whale populations function.

The fact is: Whales and cows are different. I repeat: whales and cows ARE DIFFERENT. You cannot say you MUST treat one the same as another, that's unwarranted seeing as they are very different.

The latest argument for Japanese Whaling is this: Fishing industries are turning up less and less fish. Certain fish species are disapearing...who's responsible? Man? Nope, its the Whales.

The whales are eating too much fish, so the argument goes. "They are competition". We must hunt the over-populated species of whale to save the ecosystem.

I know its luny but its true. Here are some links to debunk it.

<a href="http://whales7.tripod.com/policies/dwindle.html" target="_blank">http://whales7.tripod.com/policies/dwindle.html</a>

<a href="http://www.panda.org/resources/publications/water/food-web/eat.html" target="_blank">http://www.panda.org/resources/publications/water/food-web/eat.html</a>

<a href="http://www.hsus.org/ace/14786" target="_blank">http://www.hsus.org/ace/14786</a>

<a href="http://www.hsus.org/ace/14805" target="_blank">http://www.hsus.org/ace/14805</a>

<a href="http://whales.greenpeace.org/news/10may2001.html" target="_blank">http://whales.greenpeace.org/news/10may2001.html</a>

<a href="http://www.cousteausociety.org/tcs_issues_whales.html" target="_blank">http://www.cousteausociety.org/tcs_issues_whales.html</a>

Seraphim

"The latest argument for Japanese Whaling is this: Fishing industries are turning up less and less fish. Certain fish species are disapearing...who's responsible? Man? Nope, its the Whales.

The whales are eating too much fish, so the argument goes. "They are competition". We must hunt the over-populated species of whale to save the ecosystem."

My reply : Great example of humanity. You should work in a slaughter house ... unless you are in a slaughter house.

As for whales eating too much fish, correct me if I'm wrong ... but I thought whales eat those tiny protozoas ...
The whole process of killing one species to perserve another is as bogus as it gets. You know why?

In 1970s, in US's National Park - Yellow Stone Park (I'm pretty sure this is the name), the management of the park thought by reducing the number of Wolves in the park, it will help other creatures to survive. Guess what happened ... Wolves population was needed to keep in check other creature in the wild and the whole system collapse when there weren't many wolves to go around and killing off sick and weak animals or other predator like animals. I got this from a documentary about Yellow Stone last year and you can find more yourself.

Humans know little about nature than they do about themselves. Talking like they know nature is another arrogant example.

The Lone Ranger

Seraphim, please pardon my butting in, but I do hope the above was not meant as an insult to Primal. As it's worded, it certainly comes across as such. Primal had made it quite clear in his post that he does not approve of this justification for whaling.

Quote:

As for whales eating too much fish, correct me if I'm wrong ... but I thought whales eat those tiny protozoas ...

Broadly speaking, extant whale species can be divided into two groups, the baleen whales and the toothed whales.

The baleen whales [such as blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus) and humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae)] feed by opening their mouths underwater, then forcing the water out through plates of baleen -- in other words, they're filter feeders. No whales feed on protozoans, but some baleen whales feed on zooplankton such as small shrimplike crustaceans known as krill. Baleen whales with more widely-spaced baleen plates feed largely upon squid and small schooling fish.

The toothed whales are active predators, hunting fish, squid, other marine mammals, and occasionally penguins. Sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus), for example, appear to feed mostly upon giant squid and various fish species. The so-called "killer" whales (Orcinus orca) prey largely upon fish and squid, as well as marine mammals (including other large whales, which they hunt in "packs"), and in the southern oceans, penguins.

Cheers,

Michael

Agricola Senior

If you feed on animals (cows, whales or whatever) you kill indirectly 5-10 times more plants than if you eat only plants.

The AntiChris

Well, I haven't yet seen a compelling "rational" reason for outlawing whaling.

It seems to me that what some people are attempting to do is to rationalise arbitrary and selective empathy (an essentially irrational emotion) for different species of sentient non-human animals.

Of course, as Primal has pointed out, not all animals are equal. However, I suspect the reasons for our contrasting attitudes to the slaughter of cattle and whales are more to do with cultural and societal norms than any inherent differences in the animals themselves or the methods of slaughter. The fact is that in some cultures the eating of beef is the norm and in others the eating of whale meat is the norm.

It seems to me that the real question is, why do we have empathy for any non-human animal?

Are meat-eaters who selectively empathise with certain animals less rational than vegetarians? My "gut-feeling" is that the vegetarian position, by virtue of being consistent, is more rationally justifiable. However my problem is that when challenged, I'm buggered if I can rationally justify any empathy for non-human animals!

Until someone can come up with a rational justification for human empathy for any non-human animal, any debate about the "rights" of a particular animal or species is essentially about personal/cultural tastes and preferences and therefore has no definitive right or wrong answer.

Chris