• 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!

Who's at fault?

is whaling wrong?


  • Total voters
    38
I think in the day and age where we pollute oceans by destroying coral reefs and dumping toxic waste, it is important to protect the few exotics animals we have left. I have no problem with a few genetically indistinct cows being eaten but there are certain animals which are so historically and culturally precious that we should protect them. I doubt many Americans would agree with bald eagles being hunted to anywhere near extinction. Why? It is our national symbol. We should extend the same courtesy to other animals we can't really afford to have on the extinction list.

Do you support the methods of these anti-whaling protesters?
 
The protesters are not out to do physical harm to the whalers. However, their stated goal is to destroy them economically. I feel that alone gives the whalers the right to defend themselves by any means they choose. I'm sure the whalers have families to provide for and should be allowed to do so without nutjobs doing everthing they can to interfere with their livlihoods. I'm only saying this because I'm not convinced they are doing anything illegally, just doing something many of us find distasteful.
 
Do you support the methods of these anti-whaling protesters?

What are the world governments doing? Nothing? Obviously considering that whaling and seal hunts, which are barbaric practices are still going on. So yes. I do support this form of public protesting.
 
So if they were hunting whales just for food the protesters wouldn't be trying to stop them?
hunting for food is illegal. and that is precisely what they are doing, and yes, protestors would try to stop them. it's illegal.
 
The protesters are not out to do physical harm to the whalers. However, their stated goal is to destroy them economically. I feel that alone gives the whalers the right to defend themselves by any means they choose. I'm sure the whalers have families to provide for and should be allowed to do so without nutjobs doing everthing they can to interfere with their livlihoods. I'm only saying this because I'm not convinced they are doing anything illegally, just doing something many of us find distasteful.
these whalers are hunting whales for food under false pretenses. they should be arrested.
 
hunting for food is illegal. and that is precisely what they are doing, and yes, protestors would try to stop them. it's illegal.

So it matters not to the protesters why they are hunting whales is what you are saying? Then why say "no, they are trying to stop people from hunting whales under the guise of research. wrong tactics, though." if they do not give a rats ass why they are hunting whales?




it's illegal.
Not for everybody.

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_whaling]Aboriginal whaling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
What are the world governments doing? Nothing? Obviously considering that whaling and seal hunts, which are barbaric practices are still going on. So yes. I do support this form of public protesting.

Is there a limit to what you think is acceptable for civilians to try to stop whalers?
 
Is there a limit to what you think is acceptable for civilians to try to stop whalers?

I think that surrounding the whales to protect them should be legal. I support legal means of protest and I also support educating the American and Japanese people about the cruelty of these practices so that there is political pressure to renegotiate the fishing treaties.

The problem with these tactics is that they put the attention on the protesters, and not on what is ostensibly being protected. The focus should only, ever, be on the whales.
 
So it matters not to the protesters why they are hunting whales is what you are saying? Then why say "no, they are trying to stop people from hunting whales under the guise of research. wrong tactics, though." if they do not give a rats ass why they are hunting whales?





Not for everybody.

Aboriginal whaling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
james, the japanese are hunting the whales illegally. period.

what don't you understand about that statement?
 
I think that surrounding the whales to protect them should be legal. I support legal means of protest and I also support educating the American and Japanese people about the cruelty of these practices so that there is political pressure to renegotiate the fishing treaties.

The problem with these tactics is that they put the attention on the protesters, and not on what is ostensibly being protected. The focus should only, ever, be on the whales.

So physically trying to prevent a business from operating is acceptable to you?
 
So physically trying to prevent a business from operating is acceptable to you?

Yes, civil disobedience is fine, as long as no one is harmed.

However, the protesters have to recognize that if they are violating any laws or local ordinances, they will likely be arrested. That's part of civil disobedience.

I do not support destruction of property as a form of civil disobedience. It should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
 
Last edited:
james, the japanese are hunting the whales illegally. period.

what don't you understand about that statement?

Your argument was "no, they are trying to stop people from hunting whales under the guise of research. wrong tactics, though." Meaning these people do not care if they are hunting them for food or research.

If it illegal for one group of people to hunt an animal for food then it should be illegal for everybody.
 
Jeez, man, the day I start needing jokes like that explained to me is the day I wear a whale outfit and get some Japanese guy to shove a harpoon in my back.
Tucker, I think you just stumbled onto your halloween costume this year.:mrgreen:
 
That doesn't justify the tactics of the protesters, imo.

Some people seem to think it is fine to rammed, sabotaged, shot water canons at and thrown stink bombs at businesses and stop a business from operating just as long as it stops whalers. I think those who support the tactics(have rammed, sabotaged, shot water canons at and thrown stink bombs on whalers and commercial fishing vessels and surrounded certain areas to prevent the whalers from operating and trespassed on other boats) of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society would calling those who did that same **** to businesses here in the US a bunch of loons and demand that they be arrested and physically prevented from doing so in the future.
 
Last edited:
Some people seem to think it is fine to rammed, sabotaged, shot water canons at and thrown stink bombs at businesses and stop a business from operating just as long as it stops whalers. I think those who support the tactics(have rammed, sabotaged, shot water canons at and thrown stink bombs on whalers and commercial fishing vessels and surrounded certain areas to prevent the whalers from operating) of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society would calling those who did that same **** to businesses here in the US a bunch of loons and demand that they be arrested and physically prevented from doing so in the future.

I'm not one of those people. I have no problems with passive civil disobedience, but I have zero tolerance for thugs who want to use violence and property damage to impose their will on everyone else. I think they should be chained to the sidewalk in Time's Square for patriots and bums alike to spit on.
 
I'm not one of those people. I have no problems with passive civil disobedience, but I have zero tolerance for thugs who want to use violence and property damage to impose their will on everyone else. I think they should be chained to the sidewalk in Time's Square for patriots and bums alike to spit on.





Or smash their little boat with your big boat! :shrug:
 
The Japs were whaling in Australian waters, and therfore what they were doing was illegal.

Then the protesters should have notified the Australian authorities, and waited for the Aussie Navy and/or coast guard folks to show up and handle their business. They also could attempt to keep their boats between the whales and the whalers. And, they should have used their cameras and recorders to document the law violations that they observed for the use of the relevant government authorities. I do not consider vandals and vigilantes to be helpful to the cause of protecting vulnerable wildlife populations. When all is said and done, they're criminals like the criminals they're ostensibly fighting.

The end DOES NOT justify engaging in criminal tactics.
 
Last edited:
Yes, civil disobedience is fine, as long as no one is harmed.

However, the protesters have to recognize that if they are violating any laws or local ordinances, they will likely be arrested. That's part of civil disobedience.
These "protesters" engage in assault tactics, they aren't just shouting insults and slogans, they are engaging in tactics that damage and cripple vessels, for that alone I have zero sympathy for them, and if one of the protest ships happen to get sunk, well, good riddance. Also, this is only one phase of these enviro nuts "civil disobedience" other examples are trespassing on private property and chaining themselves to loggers trees, spiking trees so that chainsaw blades will snap and injure employees, the ELF torching a car dealership that specializes in SUV's(in an ironic twist, the damaged caused by this released more pollutants per vehicle than they ever would have in their operative lives), burning homes where these groups don't think people should live(trespassing, arson, criminal damage to property), etc. etc. No, this isn't civil disobedience, this is active physical and criminal syndication.

I do not support destruction of property as a form of civil disobedience. It should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
Then you are against these protesters.
 
Your argument was "no, they are trying to stop people from hunting whales under the guise of research. wrong tactics, though." Meaning these people do not care if they are hunting them for food or research.

If it illegal for one group of people to hunt an animal for food then it should be illegal for everybody.
this is ridiculous. why they were hunting the whales, in this case, makes no difference. neither group is in the right here. we were not discussing the things should be, but the way they are.
 
I'm not one of those people. I have no problems with passive civil disobedience, but I have zero tolerance for thugs who want to use violence and property damage to impose their will on everyone else. I think they should be chained to the sidewalk in Time's Square for patriots and bums alike to spit on.

What do you define as passive? Preventing access? Chaining yourself to property? Intimidation?
 
Back
Top Bottom