Whaler's Beef

[johnfb]

I would eat dolphin if it were on the table. One could certainly train a pig to be just as social and clever as a dolphin at the zoo. So, probably it has to do with a cultural and medial picture of the particular species (?).

Which is my emotive arguement...you could teach a pig to whistle "singing in the rain" and no Jew or Muslim would ever eat it.
A dog could attack someone and rip them to pieces and people in most countries in the world would not eat it, you could make dolphin taste like Heaven and not many people would eat it...It makes no difference what the animal does or does not do, it makes no difference if the animal is seen as "cute" and then as "not cute"....it's all emotive....(and cultural too it must be said)
The media part I would not really agree with, as I said if a dog rips someone to bits we don't say okay THAT dog was bad ...lets eat it.

[saucisson]

probably it has to do with a cultural and medial picture of the particular species (?). Confused

I would much rather eat dog than dolphin, chimp, orang utang or other higher mammal.

I wouldn't have that bias against dogs if it was purely a cultural influence at work (speaking personally).

And if the media influenced me I wouldn't eat venison after watching Bambi as a small child, yet I do.

[grisell]

I agree 100%, johnfb.

[grisell]

It can't just be cuteness, or would you call this one cute?

http://www.yukul.com/yukul/yukulhistory ... Whale.html

A matter of opinion, of course.

[johnfb]

Slightly off topic, but about eating things nonetheless.

I had a debate with someone a while back about cannibalism.
They said they would never eat human flesh...I didn't go into the plane crash bit and being lost in the Andes etc but asked them would they take a vital organ such as liver or heart or kidneys from an organ donor if they were dying in a hospital bed.
They said yes, so I asked if they were dying from hunger and someone was dead beside them would they not eat the liver or heart or kidneys to survive, is it not the same thing. Is it not the consumption of organs to give life to you or another, one is under an operation the other is simply eating it...the end result is exactly the same...one is dead and the othre is alive ???

I was just playing Devils advocate but it certainly got a great debate going.

[johnfb]

It can't just be cuteness, or would you call this one cute?

http://www.yukul.com/yukul/yukulhistory ... Whale.html

A matter of opinion, of course.

Hey, what's my mother in law doing on the web ????

[saucisson]

Slightly off topic, but about eating things nonetheless.

I had a debate with someone a while back about cannibalism.
They said they would never eat human flesh...I didn't go into the plane crash bit and being lost in the Andes etc but asked them would they take a vital organ such as liver or heart or kidneys from an organ donor if they were dying in a hospital bed.
They said yes, so I asked if they were dying from hunger and someone was dead beside them would they not eat the liver or heart or kidneys to survive, is it not the same thing. Is it not the consumption of organs to give life to you or another, one is under an operation the other is simply eating it...the end result is exactly the same...one is dead and the othre is alive ???

I was just playing Devils advocate but it certainly got a great debate going.

You need some fava beans and a nice chianti, then it's OK.

[johnfb]

You need some fava beans and a nice chianti, then it's OK.

[wheels]

Mmm. But that article is about illegal whaling which I don't support. Illegal hunting worldwide isn't limited to whales. I was refering to controlled quota.

See:

Norway is in blatant violation of the global moratorium on commercial whaling imposed by the International Whaling Commission in 1986. Japan uses the pretext of "scientific whaling" to justify their illegal activities whereas Norway simply ignores the moratorium.

And:

Norway requested a resumption of commercial whaling in 1992. Japan proposed a commercial hunt for the minke whale in the southern hemisphere, and Iceland sought to resume the commercial harvest of fin whales within its territorial waters. The IWC rejected all three proposals on the grounds that its scientific committee was developing a new stock assessment procedure and that the decision to resume commercial whaling should await additional information and reclassification.

And

As Norway has lodged objections to the relevant items in the Schedule, it has exercised its right to set national catch limits for its coastal whaling operations for minke whales. The Commission passed a Resolution calling on Norway to halt all whaling activities under its jurisdiction.

The argument that the Norwegian catch is somehow legal because it's sanctioned by a sovereign power may just fall into being 'technically correct', but many would say that it's illegal in the same way that sovereign countries that continue abhorrent behaviours against (say) UN resolutions are said to be acting illegally. Most fair minded people would also assume that whales caught under the scientific permit whaling scheme should be used for that purpose alone.

As such I would suggest that you are supporting illegal whaling.

Phil

[grisell]

I respect your view. It's a matter of opinion.

[wheels]

Is it?

Is whether something is legal or not a matter of opinion? I'll tell the magistrate that next time I'm in court!

Phil

[saucisson]

It is Andre's opinion it is OK to eat whalemeat supplied by Norwegian whalers.

I think some opinions are best kept to oneself, lest they offend

I'm surprised it didn't occur to you.

Moving the subject to Chatter.