Canada Seal Slaughter begins

Cleon said:
Look, Dustin, you obviously don't like the fact that you had your own words thrown back at you.


Tough.
Click to expand...

You never 'threw' anything back at me. You criticized my stance that aggressive debating works to get your point across and then insulted me, as if insults gets ones points across.
 
I wouldn't worry about it Cleon, Dustin is like those christians who cry that they are being victimized because they aren't allowed to hang jews. He'll bully people around until someone takes a stand, then he'll cry that he's a victim.
 
Dustin Kesselberg said:
It didn't make any sense. How was it a joke? Do you frequently pass something off as a joke after it's established that it makes no sense?
Click to expand...

Actually, I've passed off most of what you post as a joke, funny thing is that you don't get it.

Arrogant, sanctimonious, in your face animal rights activists have no idea about how what they do actually makes the general public want to scoff and eat more meat.


Oh, and I made an error, P.J. O'Rourke came up with the quote. From the book "All the Trouble in the World" a great book, worth reading if you can unclench your ass.
 
thaiboxerken said:
I wouldn't worry about it Cleon, Dustin is like those christians who cry that they are being victimized because they aren't allowed to hang jews. He'll bully people around until someone takes a stand, then he'll cry that he's a victim.
Click to expand...

I am a Jew, and also I agree with Dustin's position on this thread, which, last I checked, is about the ethics involved with clubbing live seals. I do not sense antisemitism nor over-aggression in his posts on this thread.
 
Dr. Lao said:
Oh, and I made an error, P.J. O'Rourke came up with the quote. From the book "All the Trouble in the World" a great book, worth reading if you can unclench your ass.
Click to expand...

Considering the brand of "humor" you have demonstrated, I'm thinking that it's probably not that funny at all.

Now this is humor. It actually makes sense.

Your quotation above did not make sense.

Glad we cleared that up.
 
Ooo, I offended Mr. Snippybottoms.

P.J. O'Rourke is a great writer, millions agree.

Lighten up Francis, the world has enough sanctimonious know-it-alls.
 
Dr. Lao said:
Ooo, I offended Mr. Snippybottoms.
Click to expand...

Mature, Lao. Mature. :rolleyes:

P.J. O'Rourke is a great writer, millions agree.
Click to expand...

That's fine. The only exposure of him that you're giving isn't very interesting to me, though.

"Millions" of people like the show CSI, doesn't make me like it.

Billions of people also believe in some kind of deity. Doesn't make me think that they're right.

Lighten up Francis, the world has enough sanctimonious know-it-alls.
Click to expand...

You're right, it does. And you can definitely work to stop being one.

"OMG! You stupid retard, you can't get a joke because you didn't find this particular one funny even though it made no sense, LOL! Unclench your ass while I wipe the drool off my chin!"

:rolleyes:

The irony is amazing.
 
Last edited:
steverino said:
I am a Jew, and also I agree with Dustin's position on this thread, which, last I checked, is about the ethics involved with clubbing live seals. I do not sense antisemitism nor over-aggression in his posts on this thread.
Click to expand...

I've learned that spending much time responding to the posts of "Thaiboxerken" is a waste of time. In this thread as well as the one about Burgerking's stance on animal rights, I spent a lot of time responding to him only to be ignored. I address something he says in vast detail and then he ignores it and continues claiming that I never addressed it or simply says I'm "wrong". For instance my intelligence rubric for measuring ethical treatment and rights. He continually calls it "arbitrary" even though I've explained in detail how it isn't. He doesn't address my posts explaining how it isn't yet he still continues to claim it. This is why It's a waste of time discussing anything with him.
 
It is completely arbitrary to pick intelligence as a measure of how to treat other species simply because it is no more or less important a trait than any other trait. You simply value it more. It's as arbitrary as using cuteness as a factor on how to treat other animals.
 
thaiboxerken said:
It is completely arbitrary to pick intelligence as a measure of how to treat other species simply because it is no more or less important a trait than any other trait. You simply value it more. It's as arbitrary as using cuteness as a factor on how to treat other animals.
Click to expand...


See what I mean?
 
thaiboxerken said:
It's as arbitrary as using cuteness as a factor on how to treat other animals.
Click to expand...

Those of you here who are pro-clubbing have used the seals' cuteness as a device to dismiss the cruelty involved in the slaughter. IOW "Just because these creatures are cute, so what? Kill them, cruelty not withstanding."
 
steverino said:
Those of you here who are pro-clubbing have used the seals' cuteness as a device to dismiss the cruelty involved in the slaughter. IOW "Just because these creatures are cute, so what? Kill them, cruelty not withstanding."
Click to expand...

Steve, you've made that claim a couple of times now, and again I have to tell you that it's just not correct.

First, it is the anti-clubbing people who dishonestly try to bring cuteness into it, by portraying the seals as innocent, furry, and cute before the barbaric humans club them to death--again, despite the fact that hunting the whitecoats is illegal. Don't believe me? Look at the OP. It very clearly portrays the whitecoats as being the victims. (As do most of the anti-hunt websites.)

Second, you accuse "pro-clubbing" people of "dismissing the cruelty involved." Steve, at no point has it been established that the hunt is any more cruel than any other form of hunting. The claim has been made, but it has not been substantiated. On the contrary, studies seem to indicate that the hakapik is not particularly cruel. It looks awful, but then, so does any method of slaughter.

I'm more than willing to debate the issue on its merits--I'm actually neither "pro" nor "anti" clubbing, I'm neutral on the issue. If it's actually cruel and inhumane, sure, ban or regulate it. I'm all for banning the practice of shark finning, which is demonstrably a cruel practice. So far, however, the anti-hunt crowd seems unwilling--or unable--to provide any evidence that the hunt is actually cruel.
 
Cleon said:
Steve, you've made that claim a couple of times now, and again I have to tell you that it's just not correct.

despite the fact that hunting the whitecoats is illegal. Don't believe me? Look at the OP. It very clearly portrays the whitecoats as being the victims. (As do most of the anti-hunt websites.)QUOTE]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/sealhunt/

2. What about those cute whitecoat seals?

Whitecoats are newborn harp seals. Most Canadians can recall pictures of whitecoated seal pups being clubbed. The images were so inflammatory that Canada banned all hunting of whitecoats and bluebacks (in fact hooded seals) in 1987.

You'd never know that from some of the anti-sealing groups that still prominently display pictures of whitecoats on their websites and in fundraising materials. One site even features a downloadable video of people hugging whitecoats. The reality is that whitecoats can't be hunted anymore.

It's also true that young harp seals lose their white coats (and their protection) at about 12 to 14 days of age. After that, they're fair game for hunters, although they're usually about 25 days old before they're hunted. Most harp seals taken are under the age of three months. Young yes, whitecoats no.

I guess the fact that they are "at least" 12-25 days old, and "less cute" than the whitecoats makes the cruelty OK.

A 2002 report in the Canadian Veterinary Journal found that "the large majority of seals taken during this hunt … are killed in an acceptably humane manner." This study found that 98 per cent of hunted seals it examined had been killed properly.

New harp seal quota for 2007 hunt: 270,000
Harp seal quota for 2006 hunt: 325,000

OK. 270,000 + 325,000= 595,000 X 2 per cent. That's only 11,900 seals killed improperly!:mad:
Click to expand...
 
Did you read point #3 of the article you just cited Steverino? It debunks your claim that it's cruel.
 
steverino said:
I guess the fact that they are "at least" 12-25 days old, and "less cute" than the whitecoats makes the cruelty OK.
Click to expand...

Again, *I'm* not the one plastering photos of the cute widdle fuzzy-wuzzies everywhere. If the "cuteness" angle bothers you--and I'm glad that it does--take it up with the anti-hunt people who stick those pictures all over the place.


OK. 270,000 + 325,000= 595,000 X 2 per cent. That's only 11,900 seals killed improperly!:mad:
Click to expand...
Is that percentage better or worse than your average slaughterhouse? In any process, there's bound to be some margin of error, even with the industrial slaughter machines that you'd find at your friendly neighborhood slaughterhouse. In cases where the slaughter is done manually, such as the seal hunt or kosher slaughter, the number is bound to be slightly higher (human error and all that).

Then there's the angle of what happens when it's killed "improperly." It's a long road from "2% were killed improperly" to "skinned alive," as Dustin has claimed. "Improperly" could mean anything from "they had to hit it twice" to "the animal was tortured to death."
 
Last edited:
Cleon said:
"Improperly" could mean anything from "they had to hit it twice" to "the animal was tortured to death."
Click to expand...

Considering the source and its charitable statistic, I'm putting my money on the second one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom