• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Copenhagen zoo sparks outrage by killing healthy giraffe named Marius

jmotivator said:
So take the giraffe off of the breeding program. Why is that so difficult?
Click to expand...

I just explained this to you

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...hy-giraffe-named-marius-2.html#post1062903254



Why is the director of the Copenhagen zoo trying to manage the Yorkshire Wildlife Park? Why can't he accept that, as a fellow EAZA member, that they can make their own accommodations based on their own facility?
Click to expand...

Because the idea is to manage the collection as a whole

Sterilize the giraffe and send him to a private zoo. Problem solved.
Click to expand...

Do you read what you respond to? Why would you suggest selling to the public in response to a post where I am explaining why they don't engage in such practices?

I'm fairly sentimental when it comes to all living things. I'm not a big fan of killing anything without some rational purpose.
Click to expand...

There was a rational purpose here
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
Unless we acknowledge that zoos have limited space and resources. And that instead of housing a genetic dead end, that such space would be better utilized by a specimen of genetic value.
Click to expand...

There were zoos willing to take the animal though.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
why? No one was forced to be there any many people would probably love attending something like that
Click to expand...

The children were forced to be there. A lot of those viewing were under 10 years old.
 
PeteEU said:
The children were forced to be there. A lot of those viewing were under 10 years old.
Click to expand...

they were? For some reason, I have a feeling this is going to be one of those PeteEU moments where we are confronted with a vast distinction between your definition of "forced" and the one everyone else uses
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
they were? For some reason, I have a feeling this is going to be one of those PeteEU moments where we are confronted with a vast distinction between your definition of "forced" and the one everyone else uses
Click to expand...

Seriously, have you seen the pictures?

Video: Copenhagen zoo kills and dismembers young giraffe - Telegraph

It is a graphic video, and you can clearly see young children at the front. What their parents were thinking I dont know..but it is disgusting.
 
Giraffe, it's what's for dinner.
 
CRUE CAB said:
You work at a zoo?
Click to expand...

Why would I need to work at a zoo to know they call animals for similar reasons? All one would need to do is reference the AZA "Acquisition - Disposition Policy". But beyond that, I know many people who work in zoo environments
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
I just explained this to you

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...hy-giraffe-named-marius-2.html#post1062903254
Click to expand...

No, you didn't "explain it", you just regurgitated the faulty rationalization of the zoo management. Obviously there is wiigle room here given the that Yorkshire Zoo, in the same program, seemed to think they could take in the giraffe without endangering the goals of EAZA.

Because the idea is to manage the collection as a whole
Click to expand...

It's over reach on his part.

Do you read what you respond to? Why would you suggest selling to the public in response to a post where I am explaining why they don't engage in such practices?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do. I am starting to wonder if you do, though! Why would you not sell a sterilized giraffe to a public zoo? If reason for not selling to a private zoo is fear of inbreeding then you don't have to worry about that with a sterilized giraffe! By sterilizing the giraffe you get to weed out the private zoos who only want him for breeding purposes.

What was the "rational reason" for not castrating the giraffe? According to the BBC:

"Contraception and castration have been raised as possibilities, but both would require sedation. This is a relatively high-risk procedure in the case of giraffes, as they are liable to break their necks when they fall while sedated. "
Click to expand...

A yes, completely rational! They might risk killing the giraffe, so it's better if they just kill it instead. :roll:

This is not was rational elimination of alternatives looks like.

There was a rational purpose here
Click to expand...

It was rash, not rational.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
and you can randomly label anything a horror ...
Click to expand...

Which is, of course, immaterial to the point. Your justification is useless as it has no rational boundary.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
Why would I need to work at a zoo to know they call animals for similar reasons? All one would need to do is reference the AZA "Acquisition - Disposition Policy". But beyond that, I know many people who work in zoo environments
Click to expand...

I have a niece that is a director of an aviary at a zoo in Utah, she says you are full of it. In the states at every state ran facility they do a search to find suitable homes for unwanted or un needed animals. Private zoos may do it different, but I have been to private zoos and they need to be closed.
 
jmotivator said:
Which is, of course, immaterial to the point. Your justification is useless as it has no rational boundary.
Click to expand...

No, it actually shows simply calling something a "horror" does little to define it as something negative or in the wrong. Which was obviously your intent. And the question was "why would they have a public autopsy". And pointing out that many members of the public would enjoy seeing it, seems to justify that. That is, unless you are now questioning the merits of autopsy for scientific education and research.
 
jmotivator said:
No, you didn't "explain it", you just regurgitated the faulty rationalization of the zoo management. Obviously there is wiigle room here given the that Yorkshire Zoo, in the same program, seemed to think they could take in the giraffe without endangering the goals of EAZA.
Click to expand...

lol, it was also the position of the EAZA, the organization actually managing the larger program and stud book

It's over reach on his part.
Click to expand...

actually when you join a group like the aza or EAZA these are the terms you agree to.

Why would you not sell a sterilized giraffe to a public zoo? If reason for not selling to a private zoo is fear of inbreeding then you don't have to worry about that with a sterilized giraffe! By sterilizing the giraffe you get to weed out the private zoos who only want him for breeding purposes.
Click to expand...

I just explained that to you: there are numerous concerns from treatment, to aiding and masking smuggling programs

A yes, completely rational! They might risk killing the giraffe, so it's better if they just kill it instead.

This is not was rational elimination of alternatives looks like.
Click to expand...

they are talking about future breeding events that would prevent such offspring, not about how to handle this situation
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
So I was right: people taking their kids to see a dissection is children "being forced"
Click to expand...

So you are telling us all, that a 7 year old child has any choice in the matter? Yea right.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
No, it actually shows simply calling something a "horror" does little to define it as something negative or in the wrong. Which was obviously your intent. And the question was "why would they have a public autopsy". And pointing out that many members of the public would enjoy seeing it, seems to justify that. That is, unless you are now questioning the merits of autopsy for scientific education and research.
Click to expand...

No, it is saying that your justification has no rational boundary and can be used to justify anything.

Back to the other post, care to explain why shooting an animal in the head is preferable to risking it breaking its neck?
 
CRUE CAB said:
I have a niece that is a director of an aviary at a zoo in Utah, she says you are full of it.
Click to expand...

If she is part of an aza zoo then she is a liar


In the states at every state ran facility they do a search to find suitable homes for unwanted or un needed animals. Private zoos may do it different, but I have been to private zoos and they need to be closed.
Click to expand...

Where did I suggest they didn't rehouse animals if possible?
 
PeteEU said:
So you are telling us all, that a 7 year old child has any choice in the matter? Yea right.
Click to expand...

In the context you used "forced" I don't think many people would agree with including "parental discretion" under it ...
 
jmotivator said:
No, it is saying that your justification has no rational boundary and can be used to justify anything.
Click to expand...

So you feel I need to justify autopsy as an education and research tool?

Back to the other post, care to explain why shooting an animal in the head is preferable to risking it breaking its neck?
Click to expand...

because you can't read?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom