Watson, founder of Sea Shepherd and co-founder of Greenpeace, has been arrested on an international warrant and is facing charges including accomplice to assault and ship trespass
My argument is that the average person, who is absolutely capable of living a life without the consumption of animal products
Oh so you’re a vegan got it. The Faroer don’t have enough arable land to support living off plant agriculture, they need the sea to survive. Import? Possible in principle but without fish to export, with what money? It’s like telling Inuit they should live off salad (literally what they call all vegetables): Greenland is much larger but not exactly suited for agriculture.
And much unlike bullfighting the Faroese actually take care to make the killing humane. In fact missing your shot when hunting deer should cause a lot more suffering than what they’re doing, for the most part the animals are first beached, uninjured and generally fine (it’s not like they can’t breathe air), the killing itself takes seconds. The sight of course isn’t pretty, lots of blood in shallow bays certainly leaves an impression but that impression says nothing about how much the animals suffered.
They care about continuing to whale because it’s a core part of their culture, they don’t care about preserving random details like using old and slow and awkward knife techniques instead of the current spinal lancing, they care about things like their solidarity being expressed and reinforced in the communal activity and the distribution scheme.
Once again, that’s not what I’m talking about. You’re having an argument with a strawman.
Though, I don’t particularly think you have a strong argument. Again, I refer you to my previous comment. I’m sure there are lots of cultures and societies that had to change how they made ends meet economically, and deal with the changes or ending of traditions associated with the end of the slave trade. That’s not a strong enough argument for the continuation of slavery. Likewise, tradition and economics aren’t strong enough justification to continue animal exploitation.
If you were to ask me, how would the people of the Faroe islands survive without the fishing industry, I’d say, how do you propose that OPEC nations survive without the oil and gas industries? Change is a part of life, and people need to accept that. Personally, I’d be more than happy for the state of Denmark to ensure that the needs of those people are met.
But, again, you’re forcing this argument on yourself.
Oh so you’re a vegan got it. The Faroer don’t have enough arable land to support living off plant agriculture, they need the sea to survive. Import? Possible in principle but without fish to export, with what money? It’s like telling Inuit they should live off salad (literally what they call all vegetables): Greenland is much larger but not exactly suited for agriculture.
And much unlike bullfighting the Faroese actually take care to make the killing humane. In fact missing your shot when hunting deer should cause a lot more suffering than what they’re doing, for the most part the animals are first beached, uninjured and generally fine (it’s not like they can’t breathe air), the killing itself takes seconds. The sight of course isn’t pretty, lots of blood in shallow bays certainly leaves an impression but that impression says nothing about how much the animals suffered.
They care about continuing to whale because it’s a core part of their culture, they don’t care about preserving random details like using old and slow and awkward knife techniques instead of the current spinal lancing, they care about things like their solidarity being expressed and reinforced in the communal activity and the distribution scheme.
Once again, that’s not what I’m talking about. You’re having an argument with a strawman.
Though, I don’t particularly think you have a strong argument. Again, I refer you to my previous comment. I’m sure there are lots of cultures and societies that had to change how they made ends meet economically, and deal with the changes or ending of traditions associated with the end of the slave trade. That’s not a strong enough argument for the continuation of slavery. Likewise, tradition and economics aren’t strong enough justification to continue animal exploitation.
If you were to ask me, how would the people of the Faroe islands survive without the fishing industry, I’d say, how do you propose that OPEC nations survive without the oil and gas industries? Change is a part of life, and people need to accept that. Personally, I’d be more than happy for the state of Denmark to ensure that the needs of those people are met.
But, again, you’re forcing this argument on yourself.