Some vegan's can be very self righteous and arrogant in their personal life choices. But it was good point....why do humans treat other species less humanely and cruelly than they do dogs?
Sorry I voted "Animal rights activists" because I misread the question.
My vote is actually for the Fishermen. Hunting, killing, and eating is part of the circle of life.
May as well ask the predator if he is going to be kind to their prey. Or ask those fish if they say a prayer before eating bugs or other fish.
My vote is for the fisherman/fishermen, no way around it.
Fishing is legal in this country, especially where you're designated to fish. Pretty much all living beings within our country eat other living things. That's how the world operates. The animal right activists made the point that the fish has feelings and a family, but same can be true for the plants and beans you eat.
A better, more sane, reasonable argument would revolve around how animals are treated and given short, caged lifespans, and never gets the Native American style treatment, where you use the entire animal and fish, and give thanks to the animal/fish for filling up your stomach.
In the video, the guy comes across as real d-bag. The two fishermen have the right to fish, and the animal rights guy was harassing them.
That and the idea that most fish have the same level of sentience as a human is stupid. Once fish start solving math problems or building complex societies, than I would support the protestor.
In fairness to fish, they do have feelings....and can recognize human faces....and feel pain.
So can cows
* while eating a hamburger
So is that a reason to treat them inhumanly?
Doing math and building complex societies is not what it means to be a "sentient being".
That and the idea that most fish have the same level of sentience as a human is stupid. Once fish start solving math problems or building complex societies, than I would support the protestor.
So is that a reason to treat them inhumanly?
Doing math and building complex societies is not what it means to be a "sentient being".
I can post a video of what the South Koreans do to dogs but I'm pretty it's against the rule. :shock:
I think that, the more sentient and closely adored by humans an animal is, the less likely it is that we should kill it or eat it.
Dolphins, Chimps, whales, dogs, cats...etc.
Chickens and cows and fish? Dinner time.
No, I just like meat.
True, I did look deeper into the word sentient and that was the wrong term.
We can ask her. Temple Grandin - Wikipedia
Some of our resident posters would say she's "mentally ill".£
Assuming the comment about the public fishing sign was accurate, the two fishermen were not acting illegally. The animal rights activists were acting illegally as they were harassing the fishermen, causing a public nuisance and stealing a fish legally caught by one of the two fishermen. That the animal rights activists believe they are right does not override the law. Their beliefs are their own and cannot be imposed upon others unless new laws are crafted and adopted. Before that can happen they must persuade enough of their fellow citizens that their moral position is right and should be adopted by society as a whole as an ethical position. Until then the activists are in the wrong to harass law-abiding citizens and to steal from them.
Now the animal rights activists should also consider that their lifestyle kills organisms. Why draw the line at animal rights? What about plant rights, fungal rights, protozoan rights, moneran rights and viral rights? We must kill to survive, so why deny that?
Cheers.
Evilroddy the omnivore.