Well at least we agree on something. Good day to you.
Likewise.
I never liked the statement, "It's the only way to make money, thus it's perfectly fine", personally. That seems more an argument to bring more jobs into the mix than to keep up inhumane butchering to me, personally.
And the "pride" thing? Yes, go ahead and risk your life to go slaughter animals for pride...
Your post was just a bunch of emotional bugaloo.
But I suppose your post deserves a more thorough response than what I gave.
I've mostly stayed away from the emotional aspects of this thread because I also feel them deeply. Probably deeper than anyone else here. In 1976-77 while you were protesting in Winnipeg I was visiting my uncles who were fishermen. One of them went "to the ice" every year. He didn't go there out of "Bloodlust" as one poster would have you believe.
I wouldn't have you believe that they went out of bloodlust, either. They went there to get money.
He went there to make a little bit of money to put food on the table and a roof over the head of his family. No one risks life and limb on shifting sea ice because they get some cheap sexual thrill out of killing things, they do it because there is no other way to make a living.
Like I said above, that seems more an argument for adding more jobs into the mix than it does to keep up the killing.
Now before you come back with government assistance or some such other crap let me ask you a question. How much money do you have to give a man to get him to give up his self respect?
This statement seems to have more emotion and rhetoric than anything else.
Though I do realize that government assistance is an iffy issue, especially since the government isn't quite good at assisting as many think, I'll grant.
Why should anyone be forced to avoid looking his or her children in the eyes because he/she is ashamed at not being able to care for them?
Rhetoric and emotion.
The hunt has been declared humane and the harp seal population is in no danger of extinction
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/seal-phoque/myth_e.htm
This part of your post actually has more value, admittedly. Extinction alone isn't a case for whether to continue an act or not, but according to your link, many of the methods of killing seals are considered just as humane as deaths caused by commercial slaughterhouses. If that's true (and I don't see a reason to doubt that it is), then that could also be used as more an argument against the killings in commercial slaughterhouses...
It honestly depends on how you look at it sometimes.
I have no doubt that within a very few years the commercial hunt will die a natural death and a part of my culture will be gone forever. I'm just glad Uncle Bill isn't around anymore to see it.
"Part of your culture"? Wow. Now that's really getting into the rhetoric.
If there is other economical diversity and jobs available, then why is it so bad? If there isn't, then what ways can we bring those jobs about? If it isn't the jobs that you have a main concern with, then what the hell is the problem? Oh, right, it's part of your "culture", therefore it should always be around and not questioned or protested against?
I'll say it again: I'd try to pretend to be sad that your "cultural heritage of killing seals" will be gone, but it's too hard. Just like I couldn't really be sad to see some other "cultural heritages" disappear... such as honor killing, wife beating, bride burning, and female circumcision (or male circumcision for that matter).
rather than retriever, due to the risks involved, and the sharp pointy teeth on the retriever.
