30 Oct 06
2 edits
Originally posted by Bosse de Nageyes, thanks for that one, quite missed it. Cannibalism. yeah.
Well, why draw the line at animals? Cannibalism used to be fashionable in certain parts of the world--why shouldn't it return (under suitable regulation of course)? I've yet to read a good argument against cannibalism. "But it's wrong," they say, wringing their hands--why?
I don't think whales are being hunted mainly for their meat, really. I find w ...[text shortened]... sons of aesthetics, which is to me a more important basis for decision-making than ethics.
Should be due to make a wide scale reappearance any time now.
Deep fried hamstring in garlic anyone?
or perhaps it is pickled young boys liver for you sir?
a nice sliver of breast maybe?
and not to be out done what about the KKK. must be just around the corner too.
praise be to his almighty Bush, the Lord's own personal appointment.
30 Oct 06
Originally posted by rubber duckMeat is meat and a man must eat, as the saying goes. Provided the meat was procured in a humane fashion, I'll take whatever's going...This morning, sweetbreads.
Deep fried hamstring in garlic anyone?
or perhaps it is pickled young boys liver for you sir?
a nice sliver of breast maybe?
30 Oct 06
1 edit
Originally posted by shavixmirWhy does it have to be spoken "...in a Texan accent"? They eat plenty of revolting things in New York, Chicago, Paris, Seoul, Manila and Mexico City that no right-minded Texan would ever eat. As it says on the bumper stickers down here: Don’t mess with Texas!
Spoken in a Texan accent:
"Hell yeah. I'm so proud I ate the last Whale fish swimmin' thingy. Nows I'm off to beat up my wife."
31 Oct 06
Originally posted by WulebgrMyself, yes. It's an ugly and pointless thing to do.
Do you oppose whaling when the whales are no longer endangered?
I'd make an exception for traditional hunters--in the correct cultural context, whaling isn't ugly or pointless. Tracking down whales with sonar and processing them in factory ships for commercial reasons, however, is flatly ghoulish.
31 Oct 06
Originally posted by Bosse de NageHow do those outside a culture evaluate whether the context is correct?
Myself, yes. It's an ugly and pointless thing to do.
I'd make an exception for traditional hunters--in the correct cultural context, whaling isn't ugly or pointless. Tracking down whales with sonar and processing them in factory ships for commercial reasons, however, is flatly ghoulish.
Suppose an indigenous community gave up whaling because the whales were scarce, but let fishing take up the slack, but now the fish have become scarce and the whales have become abundant again. Would the resumption of whaling meet your standards for "correct cultural context"?
31 Oct 06
1 edit
Originally posted by WulebgrThey don't. They abstain from whaling and let the Inuits get on with it.
How do those outside a culture evaluate whether the context is correct?
Indigenous cultures tend to have a view of hunting which is very pro-conservation.
To answer your question, yes--I have no problem with an indigenous community hunting whales.
31 Oct 06
Originally posted by Bosse de NageSo, you had no problems with the Makah whale hunt in 1999?
They don't. They abstain from whaling and let the Inuits get on with it.
Indigenous cultures tend to have a view of hunting which is very pro-conservation.
To answer your question, yes--I have no problem with an indigenous community hunting whales.
31 Oct 06
Originally posted by Bosse de NageThere were ugly protests, they used a high-powered rifle after the harpoon was struck to assure a humane kill, and rumors continue to abound that commercial sale to Japan may have been a motivating factor in their resumption of whaling. They had to hire some Inuits to teach them how to cut the whale after the successful kill.
Not in principle, no.
Did they go about it in an ugly way?