Help End the Cruel Harp Seal Hunt
in [Vegetarian]
|
Prev: SpayVac� Managing wildlife without slaughter?
Next: Most early humans ate primarily plant foods...
From: pearl on 13 Mar 2007 08:44 "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message news:RhhJh.38692$lY6.20827(a)edtnps90... > "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > news:et3pdu$v62$1(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > > "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message > > news:l6WIh.74648$cE3.56660(a)edtnps89... > >> "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > >> news:et0rkr$ph2$3(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > >> > "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message > >> > news:H2LIh.62343$Du6.31635(a)edtnps82... > >> >> "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > >> >> news:esvdt7$67m$2(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > >> >> > >> >> > Humans are not a naturally carnivorous species. > >> >> > >> >> Humans are naturally omnivores (both herbivore and carnivore). That > >> >> can > >> >> be > >> >> proven by simply examining our teeth. > >> > > >> > See my reply to Nobody. > >> > >> See my post about strontium/calcium in hominid fossil bone. It makes the > >> argument about teeth rather irrelevant. > > > > I'm waiting to see the data. > > > >> >> >> And how would Pearl suggest the Inuit grow cereal crops and > >> >> >> vegetables? OR is global warming going to allow them to do that? > >> >> > > >> >> > These seals are not being killed for meat. > >> >> > >> >> There is still a market for seal meat but it isn't the primary market. > >> > > >> > Again, show us data to support your claim. > >> > >> http://www.sealharvest.ca/html/products.html > > > > "Meat processing on a commercial basis has always been > > minimal since consumption is restricted to the domestic market > > in Atlantic and Arctic Canada especially in Newfoundland. " > > > > 'Most of the meat is wasted and left on the ice. Some if it is > > sold to fur farms and some is ground up into animal feed. A > > few thousand seal flippers are sold for human consumption in > > Newfoundland. > > Shows the need to better cultivate markets for seal meat. Why? What it shows is that there is no need for seal meat. > > There is also a growing black market demand > > for the seal penis bone in the Far East as some sort of voodoo > > quack remedy for impotence. > > The seal hunt is legal, the trade in such animal parts is not. Go after the > criminals. You are the ones meeting their 'demand'. You can stop it. > > There are few indigenous peoples involved in the commercial > > seal "hunt". Inuit or Native people in the North hunt mostly in > > the arctic and primarily ringed seals. Most of the sealers in the > > Gulf of St.Lawrence are residents of the Magdalen Islands > > of Quebec. These are French speaking people. Most of the > > sealers of the Newfoundland Front are descendents of the > > European immigrants. > > And? This "hunt" is not done to meet indigenous requirements. Was the reason for colonisation just to exploit the abundant wildlife? > > There are about 4500 Inuit in Newfoundland. However, the > > original Newfoundlanders, the Beothuk, were driven into > > extinction by the European immigrants. The last member of > > the Beothuk nation died in 1912. The Newfoundlanders had > > a bounty on the Beothuk and most were slain by MicMac > > Indian bounty hunters from New Brunswick and Quebec. > > Newfoundlanders also drove the Newfoundland wolf, the > > walrus, and the Labrador duck to extinction and extirpated the > > polar bear, and the pilot whale from Newfoundland territory.... > > The sons are responsible for the sins of the father? The sons are clearly continuing the sins of their fathers.
From: pearl on 13 Mar 2007 09:09 "David Johnston" <david(a)block.net> wrote in message news:bsfbv2t0p6uivoo2vj22hreg6a615j04ls(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 18:50:55 -0000, "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> > wrote: .... > >A colleague asks: "If children weren't meant to be eaten, > >then why are they made out of meat?" Answer please.. > > Children are unsuitable for human consumption because cannibalism > leads to the development of prion diseases. Eating infected animals certainly can. > If you mean to raise > children for consumption though, I recommend you raise them on a > vegetarian diet. They'll taste a lot better. They'd be unlikely to be infected too..
From: pearl on 13 Mar 2007 09:28 "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message news:iFiJh.38703$lY6.13282(a)edtnps90... > "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > news:et3pd3$v1i$1(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > > > 'By eating different species of crops and a more or less vegetarian > > diet people can change the number that a plot can feed. And large > > numbers of people do change their diets. The calories and protein > > available from present cropland could provide a vegetarian diet to > > ten billion people. A diet requiring food and feed totaling 6,000 > > calories daily for ten billion people, however, would overwhelm > > the capability of present agriculture on present cropland. The > > global totals of sun, CO2, fertilizer, and even water could produce > > far more food than what ten billion people need. > > <cut&paste snipped for brevity> > > Now it's only fair that you consider the other perspective: > > http://www.beeffrompasturetoplate.org/mythmeatproductioniswasteful.aspx Yes, I consider it to be propaganda at its 'finest'. The efficiency ratio of grain to beef gain is 16:1. The "marginal land" referred to is one third (at least) of ALL land. And one third of arable land. Now you consider the above again, including what you snipped. > And the question that begs to be asked: do you think everyone wants to be > vegetarian? All things considered, addiction to fat aside, I can't see how not. "Can you really ask what reason Pythagoras had for abstaining from flesh? For my part I rather wonder both by what accident and in what state of soul or mind the first man did so, touched his mouth to gore and brought his lips to the flesh of a dead creature, he who set forth tables of dead, stale bodies and ventured to call food and nourishment the parts that had a little before bellowed and cried, moved and lived. How could his eyes endure the slaughter when throats were slit and hides flayed and limbs torn from limb? How could his nose endure the stench? How was it that the pollution did not turn away his taste, which made contact with the sores of others and sucked juices and serums from mortal wounds? . The obligations of law and equity reach only to mankind, but kindness and benevolence should be extended to the creatures of every species, and these will flow from the breast of a true man, in streams that issue from the living fountain. Man makes use of flesh not out of want and necessity, seeing that he has the liberty to make his choice of herbs and fruits, the plenty of which is inexhaustible; but out of luxury, and being cloyed with necessaries, he seeks after impure and inconvenient diet, purchased by the slaughter of living beasts; by showing himself more cruel than the most savage of wild beasts ... were it only to learn benevolence to human kind, we should be merciful to other creatures. . It is certainly not lions and wolves that we eat out of self-defense; on the contrary, we ignore these and slaughter harmless, tame creatures without stings or teeth to harm us, creatures that, I swear, Nature appears to have produced for the sake of their beauty and grace. But nothing abashed us, not the flower-like tinting of the flesh, not the persuasiveness of the harmonious voice, not the cleanliness of their habits or the unusual intelligence that may be found in the poor wretches. No, for the sake of a little flesh we deprive them of sun, of light, of the duration of life to which they are entitled by birth and being.Why do you belie the earth, as if it were unable to feed and nourish you? Does it not shame you to mingle murder and blood with her beneficent fruits? Other carnivores you call savage and ferocious - lions and tigers and serpents - while yourselves come behind them in no species of barbarity. And yet for them murder is the only means of sustenance! Whereas to you it is superfluous luxury and crime!" Plutarch (c. 56 - 120 A.D.) (Roman historian and scholar)
From: pearl on 13 Mar 2007 09:35 "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message news:xvhJh.38694$lY6.15090(a)edtnps90... > "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > news:et3pbs$v1f$1(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > > "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message > > news:lnWIh.75072$cE3.59687(a)edtnps89... > >> "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > >> news:et0rqr$phu$1(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > >> > >> > I care about the seals and the environment. Duh. > >> > >> Harp Seals are not in any great danger of extinction, far from it, the > >> populations are quite healthy and have been stable for years. > > > > 'While the harp seal is not on Canada's species at risk list, it is > > unlikely that the population can continue to withstand the current > > levels of exploitation. > > <snip all usual ARA propaganda> Not a valid argument, again. Y'all seem to excel at ~that~. > The World Wildlife Fund supports the seal hunt. They've taken the realistic > approach and believe a sustainable hunt is the best solution for all > parties. The ARAs are ideologically driven radicals that have no connection > to seals or the communities that hunt them, other than this type of activism > is a very good way to raise funds and keep their leaders employed. If the > WWF and respected conservationists believes the hunt is sustainable, that's > good enough for me. http://www.wickedwildlifefund.com/abuse.html The WWF Endorses the Killing of Wild Animals, Too The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) gives special meaning to the word "conservation." The organization, founded in 1961 by a group of wealthy trophy hunters, apparently believes that conserving animals means keeping them around long enough for well-heeled "sportsmen" to blast them out of the woods, oceans, skies, plains of Africa, and jungles of Asia. Past WWF chapter presidents include C.R. "Pink" Gutermuth, who also served as president of the National Rifle Association, and trophy hunter Francis L. Kellogg, who is legendary for his massive kills. In its early days, the WWF even used fur auctions to raise funds. Since then, the WWF has learned that most people are appalled by hunting and trapping, so today, the organization veils its true stance under phrases like "sustainable development," arguing that killing is acceptable under some circumstances. When answering difficult questions about its policy on hunting, trapping, and whaling, the WWF is careful never to state outright that it approves of all these activities. But don't be fooled, the WWF's intentions are all too clear and deadly. Sealing According to the Web site of the WWF's Canadian office, "WWF is not an animal welfare organization. We support the hunting and consumption of wild animals provided the harvesting does not threaten the long-term survival of wildlife populations. WWF has never opposed a sustainable seal hunt in northern or eastern Canada." However, despite the WWF's portrayal of the situation, the Canadian seal hunt is anything but a "subsistence" hunt -- it is the largest slaughter of marine mammals in the world. Quotas established by the Canadian government have soared to an all-time high: 350,000 seals per year for the next three years. Not since the mid-1800s, when unrestricted slaughter saw a million seals per year killed, has so much blood been shed on the ice off Canada's East Coast. Worse is that the Canadian government has stated in internal documents that having the WWF's support for any raise in seal quotas is important, and the WWF's position statement suggests that it had been working with the Canadian government before the quota was announced. In other words, the WWF had the power to help avert the largest quota of harp seal pups in history but chose, instead, to let it happen without so much as a word of opposition. Whaling While the WWF states that it opposes "commercial whaling," it does support the slaughter of whales by native tribes and under some other conditions. When asked directly about its policy, WWF is vague, stating: "WWF's views on whether sustainable whaling should be permitted derive from its mission 'to conserve nature and ecological processes and to help build a future in which humans live in harmony with nature.'" In the past, WWF officials have clearly stated that "WWF International has the national WWF organizations behind it in the view that as soon as one can ensure a sustainable commercial harvest of the great whales under secure international control, then whaling will no longer be a WWF concern." Sport Hunting As one would expect of an organization founded by hunters, the WWF does not oppose the slaughter of animals with guns and other weapons for sport. Rather than working to stop the killing, the WWF believes that hunting should be regulated, arguing that wealthy trophy hunters can bring income to poorer nations. The WWF claims that it has no power to stop hunting, stating, "The decision to allow trophy hunting is a sovereign one made entirely by the governments concerned. . We will continue to monitor governments' enforcement of important trade laws to ensure that trophy hunting is done within the legal standards of that area." Elephants The WWF believes that culling-another way of saying "killing"-elephants is acceptable, as is the trade in ivory, because the profits that it brings spur governments to keep elephants from going extinct. In 2000, U.S. News & World Report reported that WWF representatives traveled to Nairobi to ask the United Nations to lift the ban on the ivory trade in order to allow a "sustainable harvest of ivory for horns and hunting trophies." The WWF's bizarre view-that we must kill some animals now in order to save animals to kill later-has proved false time and again. The trade in ivory has only encouraged rampant poaching, the senseless slaughter of elephants. The WWF tries to duck the issue by falsely stating, "The decision to cull, or to select animals from the herd for removal or death, is indeed an agonizing choice, but it is one made entirely by the governments concerned and there is no international involvement in those decisions." Trapping As with hunting and whaling, the WWF refuses to condemn the massive killing of animals with steel-jaw leghold traps. While calling itself a "preservationist" organization that "seek[s] to be the voice for those creatures who have no voice," the WWF stands back from the issue, stating that "the trade in furs, skins, and other products of animals that are not endangered isn't the focus of our campaign." But no matter how hard the WWF tries to "greenwash" its support of animal slaughter, its real message rings out loud and clear: Animals are ours to hunt, trap, kill, poison, and use as we see fit. And although appeals to preserve genetic diversity, ecosystems, and the planet sound good on paper, they mean little if what the WWF is really advocating is more efficient killing fields. Wolf Hunting Despite an ongoing international tourist boycott that was called in response to the wolf "control" program in Alaska, in which at least 100 wolves have been shot as of March 2004, the WWF is promoting several trips to Alaska throughout June, July, and August 2004 as part of "WWF Travel," an "ecotourism" program. When asked why the WWF was sending its members to Alaska, effectively undermining efforts to save wolves in the state, the WWF travel desk representative stated that the WWF did not consider the matter of wolf-killing a priority.'
From: pearl on 13 Mar 2007 09:58
"Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message news:2yhJh.38696$lY6.30394(a)edtnps90... > "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > news:et3pb5$v1a$1(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > > "Chom Noamsky" <e(a)t.me> wrote in message > > news:NxWIh.75335$cE3.55818(a)edtnps89... > >> "pearl" <tea(a)signguestbook.ie> wrote in message > >> news:et0rna$phc$1(a)reader01.news.esat.net... > >> > >> > The seals do not belong to you. Put your own house in order. > >> > >> Yes they do. > > > > No, they do not, regardless of what you have decided, to suit you. > > Your naivety is astounding, theoretical meta-ethics do not apply here. The advanced degree of your self-delusion is what is astounding. 'Anthropocentrism By Penelope Smith Albert Einstein is quoted as saying, "A human being is part of the whole, called by us 'Universe', a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty." Many humans have an attitude that restricts their ability to understand or empathize with non-human animals and other life forms and has some serious consequences for all life on this planet. It is called anthropocentrism, or viewing man as the center or final aim of the universe. I refer to this in my book, Animal Talk, as the "human superiority complex" considering humans as superior to or the pinnacle of all forms of life. From the anthropocentric view, non-human beings that are most like human are usually considered more intelligent, for example, chimpanzees who learn to use sign language or dolphins who signal word or thought comprehension through touching electronic devices in their tanks. Animals or other life forms that don't express themselves in human ways by language or in terms easily comprehensible by common human standards are often considered less developed, inferior, more primitive or mechanistic, and usually of less importance than humans. This viewpoint has been used to justify using animals as objects for human ends. Since humans are the superior creatures, "dumb, unfeeling" non-humans can be disregarded, mistreated, subjugated, killed or whole species eliminated without much concern for their existence in itself, only their usefulness or lack of it to humankind. Many humans, as they see other animals are more like them in patterns of behavior and expression of intelligence, begin to respect them more and treat them with more regard for their rights. However, this does not transcend the trap of anthropocentrism. To increase harmony of life on Earth, all beings need to be regarded as worthy of respect, whether seen as different or similar to the human species. The anthropocentric view toward animals echoes the way in which many humans have discriminated against other humans because they were of different cultures, races, religions, or sexes. Regarding others as less intelligent or substandard has commonly been used to justify domination, cruelty or elimination of them. Too often people label what they don't understand as inferior, dumb, or to be avoided, without attempting to understand a different way of being. More enlightened humans look upon meeting people, things or animals that are different than themselves as opportunities to expand their understanding, share new realities, and become more whole. Anthropocentrism does not allow humans to bridge the artificial gap it creates. It leaves humans fragmented or alienated from much of their environment. We see the disastrous consequences of this in human disruption of the earth's ecology, causing the disintegration of health and harmony for all including human life. Anthropocentrism causes humans to misjudge animal intelligence and awareness. Humans can get too fixed in the view or model that they indeed are the center of and separate from the universe and therefore the most intelligent and aware. They then see or seek only to prove that point. Anthropocentric humans also tend to judge non-human animals according to human cultural standards, as human groups often do with other human cultures. Instead of viewing and evaluating animals according to the their own cultural experience, heredity, training and environment, they impose human environments, tests, standards and methods and evaluate animals, according to the ability to exhibit human-like behavior. This is similar to the bias that was found in college preparatory and intelligence tests, which caused anyone unfamiliar with a white middle class upbringing to score lower and therefore to be considered less intelligent. Individuals with different ethnic backgrounds could not comprehend the tests' frames of reference and therefore were not able to express their intelligence through them. When we respectfully regard animals as intelligent, sensitive fellow beings with whom we walk upon the Earth, our whole perspective of life changes. In cooperation instead of alienation, we can create a new balance and joy in living for all us here. Lets each of us do our part. http://animalliberty.com/animalliberty/articles/penelope/pene-2.html |