Slaughtering of Dolphins and Whales

[Riverwolf]

Dolphins are kind of a sacred animal for me, so for me, the consumption of them feels akin to the consumption of dogs.

I'm not against meat-eating in general... but I am WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGAINST the way animals are most often treated before being killed.

 

[Noaidi]

A number of years ago, I visited the Faroe Islands - a community that still hunts pilot whales. This is a community that has a high proportion of 4x4s, satellite dishes on virtually every house and a general high standard of living, yet they still, en masse, wade into the sea and sever the spinal cords of pilot whales that they have herded into bays. The meat is distributed among the islanders, but they no longer need it to survive. The hunt is continued because of tradition, but Faroese health authorities are now advocating that whale meat not be consumed because of the high levels of toxicity accumulated in the meat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling_in_the_Faroe_Islands

[youtube]cCPfT2AjZvY[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCPfT2AjZvY&feature=related

This activity does not need to happen.

 

[Gemini]

^ Re: Faroe Islands. (can't figure out how to quote selected portions on my phone), I hope we can all agree that there is something wrong with that practice.

 

[murtaad]

I have to admit that I see the killing of dolphins and whales as an extremely barbaric practice. I would put it on the same level as eating housepets as is done in China.

I am a huge supporter of Sea Sheperd and their conservation efforts.

 

[Oneatatime]

From an ethical point of view I find it hard to justify eating meat, especially the meat from more aware organisms, when I am able to sustain myself on a vegetarian or even vegan diet with the use of suppliments.

Unfortunately my love of meat and a lack of moral conviction on the issue means I still eat meat even through I cannot justify doing so. However I wouldn't eat dolphin or whale anymore than I would eat dog because these organisms fall within my moral circle in part because I've not grown up eating them and because I recognise that they are seemingly emotionally aware and clearly social creatures.

I'd love to swim with dolphins.

 

[Valjean]

Intelligence, cuteness &c should not be factors in out treatment of other animals, just as they're not factors in our moral obligation toward our fellow hominids.
Our moral relationship with the finned, furred and feathered should be based on exactly the same factors we base our human obligations on. Equal factors -- equal treatment. Different factors -- different obligations.

 

[Oneatatime]

Intelligence, cuteness &c should not be factors in out treatment of other animals, just as they're not factors in our moral obligation toward our fellow hominids.
Our moral relationship with the finned, furred and feathered should be based on exactly the same factors we base our human obligations on. Equal factors -- equal treatment. Different factors -- different obligations.

I feel that simpler organisms are comparable to robots in that they follow a set of predetermined behaviours in respons to certain sensory inputs. As such they aren't comparable to humans, irrespective of their ecological or scientific importance.

I do not dispute that they have an intrinsic value, just the form this value takes.

 

[Valjean]

I agree, Oneatatime. Simple organisms aren't self aware, don't have any particular interest in continuing to live, don't anticipate futurity and know no fear of death.

They have value, to be sure, but no self-interest and, thus, a questionable claim for moral consideration.

The more aware creatures, on the other hand, can claim the same qualities that entitle hominids to moral consideration and should, reasonably, be put in the same category.

 

[Pegg]

I dont believe that when God created us he intended for us to actually eat animal meat. The bible shows that before Noahs flood, people did not eat meat at all. The food that God gave man was Gen 1:29 And God went on to say: “Here I have given to YOU all vegetation bearing seed which is on the surface of the whole earth and every tree on which there is the fruit of a tree bearing seed. To YOU let it serve as food. 30 And to every wild beast of the earth and to every flying creature of the heavens and to everything moving upon the earth in which there is life as a soul I have given all green vegetation for food.” And it came to be so.
And you might have noticed in Vs 30 that even the animals only ate vegetation too. So we can be pretty sure that in Gods new world, we will all be vegetarians and so will the animals. Then no more slaughtering will ever happen again.

 

[painted wolf]

So Abel was just raising animals for fun then?

wa:do

 

[Pegg]

So Abel was just raising animals for fun then?

wa:do

Do dog breeders or cat breeders do so for food?

Is it impossible that he reared sheep/goats simply because they were beautiful animals?

 

[painted wolf]

Do dog breeders or cat breeders do so for food?

In most parts of the world, and for most of our history... yes.

Is it impossible that he reared sheep/goats simply because they were beautiful animals?

Doubtful... seeing as Adam and Eve are already described as wearing skins as clothing.

And why would God want them slaughtered and burned up as a "sweet offering" if they were just cuddly pets?

wa:do

 

[Pegg]

In most parts of the world, and for most of our history... yes.

Doubtful... seeing as Adam and Eve are already described as wearing skins as clothing.

And why would God want them slaughtered and burned up as a "sweet offering" if they were just cuddly pets?

wa:do

people breed animals for all sorts of reasons, food is one, but the genesis account shows that animals were not eaten prior to the flood. Able reared his herd and offered some as a sacrifice to God.

It is only after Noah came out of the ark that God gives permission for animals to be eaten. If they were already being eaten by Gods servants, then there would not be much point in stating it as permissible.

Before the flood genesis says: “As for you, take for yourself every sort of food that is eaten; and you must gather it to yourself, and it must serve as food for you and for them,” Ge 6:21) Then after the Flood, “Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to you.Ge 9:3, 4. So this is a change in diet from 'green vegetation' to 'every moving animal'

 

[painted wolf]

So they raised and killed animals for sacrifice and clothing but left the meat to rot away... that's amazingly wasteful.

Your bible quote only shows that God makes a point to insist that there are no dietary restrictions given to Noah... not that he didn't eat meat before then. If they weren't eating animals before how did they know the difference between clean and unclean animals when God told him to gather two of one and seven of the other? That is a dietary law, one that Noah would only know if that was how he had been faithfully living already.

With food so limited, it was necessary for God to lift the dietary laws and then reinstate them at a later time when people were ready for them.

wa:do

 

[Pegg]

So they raised and killed animals for sacrifice and clothing but left the meat to rot away... that's amazingly wasteful.

Your bible quote only shows that God makes a point to insist that there are no dietary restrictions given to Noah... not that he didn't eat meat before then. If they weren't eating animals before how did they know the difference between clean and unclean animals when God told him to gather two of one and seven of the other? That is a dietary law, one that Noah would only know if that was how he had been faithfully living already.

With food so limited, it was necessary for God to lift the dietary laws and then reinstate them at a later time when people were ready for them.

wa:do

the clean and unclean had to do with animals used in worship...the ones that were acceptable for sacrifices and the ones that were not. And you may recall that God gave Adam and Eve animal skins as clothing...so its likely they were breeding animals for clothing purposes too ( i didnt think of that before)

Thats how we view the meaning of the the scriptures. Preflood, only vegetation was eaten by both man and animals, but after the flood, meat was included in mans diet probably because when they came out of the ark, they wouldnt have had much vegetation to eat from, so the animals would have provided them sustenance until the vegetation began to grow again.

Also to be noted is the fact that after the flood, God told Noah that he will put a fear of man into the animals. Obviously that fear was not there prior to that time. And the fear would have given the animals some protection now that man was permitted to eat them. This would have given them a handicap in order to ensure they would have a chance at survival considering they would now be hunted by man.
Gen 9:1-2 And God went on to bless Noah and his sons and to say to them: “Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth. 2 And a fear of YOU and a terror of YOU will continue upon every living creature of the earth and upon every flying creature of the heavens, upon everything that goes moving on the ground, and upon all the fishes of the sea. Into YOUR hand they are now given

 

[painted wolf]

If clean and unclean have nothing to do with diet... then why does god later command people not to eat unclean animals? Did he suddenly decide it was icky?

And making all animals afraid of man was likely to keep Noah and his small family from being eaten by a lion or something... if they weren't afraid of man before, there was nothing to stop a single lion from eating every living person on Earth in a few days.

wa:do

 

[Pegg]

If clean and unclean have nothing to do with diet... then why does god later command people not to eat unclean animals? Did he suddenly decide it was icky?

its highly likely that the reason for it was because they were the foods eaten by pagan nations as part of their false worship. The Babylonians for instance had rituals where the animals they ate (including pigs) were strangled in sacrifice, then eaten as part of the ritual. So perhaps the animals under the mosaic law that were specified as unclean, included those ones.


Also, some of the animals in the list of unclean ones, are actually scavenger type animals...they will eat dead things... that would be highly undignified as an offering to God. Perhaps those animals had the tendency to carry diseases, under the law, the animal that was to be offered had to be free of disease, sickness and injury. So that might be another reason.

And making all animals afraid of man was likely to keep Noah and his small family from being eaten by a lion or something... if they weren't afraid of man before, there was nothing to stop a single lion from eating every living person on Earth in a few days.

wa:do

unless lions were not meat eaters. Perhaps they only ate dead meat? But whatever the case, the animals were tame and timid before the flood. That is why Noah could house them all on one vessel and not be injured in the process. The account says the animals came into the ark willingly at Gods command.

Interestingly, the bible says that in Gods cleansed world, animals will not harm humans, nor will they harm each other...

Isaiah 11;6 And the wolf will actually reside for a while with the male lamb, and with the kid the leopard itself will lie down, and the calf and the maned young lion and the well-fed animal all together; and a mere little boy will be leader over them. 7 And the cow and the bear themselves will feed; together their young ones will lie down. And even the lion will eat straw just like the bull. 8 And the sucking child will certainly play upon the hole of the cobra; and upon the light aperture of a poisonous snake will a weaned child actually put his own hand. 9 They will not do any harm or cause any ruin in all my holy mountain; because the earth will certainly be filled with the knowledge of Jehovah as the waters are covering the very sea.

 

[work in progress]

the clean and unclean had to do with animals used in worship...the ones that were acceptable for sacrifices and the ones that were not. And you may recall that God gave Adam and Eve animal skins as clothing...so its likely they were breeding animals for clothing purposes too ( i didnt think of that before)

Thats how we view the meaning of the the scriptures. Preflood, only vegetation was eaten by both man and animals, but after the flood, meat was included in mans diet probably because when they came out of the ark, they wouldnt have had much vegetation to eat from, so the animals would have provided them sustenance until the vegetation began to grow again.

Also to be noted is the fact that after the flood, God told Noah that he will put a fear of man into the animals. Obviously that fear was not there prior to that time. And the fear would have given the animals some protection now that man was permitted to eat them. This would have given them a handicap in order to ensure they would have a chance at survival considering they would now be hunted by man.
Gen 9:1-2 And God went on to bless Noah and his sons and to say to them: “Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth. 2 And a fear of YOU and a terror of YOU will continue upon every living creature of the earth and upon every flying creature of the heavens, upon everything that goes moving on the ground, and upon all the fishes of the sea. Into YOUR hand they are now given

This is not real history! This is presenting mythology as historical facts. For what it's worth, after growing up as a Jehovah's Witness, the whole belief system started unraveling after I did further reading about geology and other earth sciences.

Regarding the eating of animals, especially intelligent animals like pigs and cows, I started becoming conflicted about eating meat after a brief stint working in a slaughter house. I don't like the commercial hunting of whales and dolphins, but the elephant in the room is factory farming, that supplies cheap meat products through externalizing the environmental costs. If it wasn't for the corn and soybean subsidies, and the freedom to pollute land, rivers and create dead zones from fertilizer and waste runoffs, meat would be a lot more expensive, and a lot smaller portion of our diets...and most people would be a lot healthier for it.

 

[Pegg]

This is not real history! This is presenting mythology as historical facts. For what it's worth, after growing up as a Jehovah's Witness, the whole belief system started unraveling after I did further reading about geology and other earth sciences.

I think it is real history and it is presented as real history by the writer. I was watching a doco about the first pharoah recently and the archeologists who were studying a particular tablet said that when there are many specific details in a text...such as dates, places, people etc, then its a sign that the text is not just a story. They take it as evidence of real events. I have no doubt that the genesis account is a real history of mans beginning.

Regarding the eating of animals, especially intelligent animals like pigs and cows, I started becoming conflicted about eating meat after a brief stint working in a slaughter house. I don't like the commercial hunting of whales and dolphins, but the elephant in the room is factory farming, that supplies cheap meat products through externalizing the environmental costs. If it wasn't for the corn and soybean subsidies, and the freedom to pollute land, rivers and create dead zones from fertilizer and waste runoffs, meat would be a lot more expensive, and a lot smaller portion of our diets...and most people would be a lot healthier for it.

i agree with you on that. farming methods ....let me just say that we should be able to do much better! For a supposed intelligent species, we can be really foolish...we are destroying our own environment in the name of progress! That doest give me much hope in the human race .

 

[work in progress]

I think it is real history and it is presented as real history by the writer. I was watching a doco about the first pharoah recently and the archeologists who were studying a particular tablet said that when there are many specific details in a text...such as dates, places, people etc, then its a sign that the text is not just a story. They take it as evidence of real events. I have no doubt that the genesis account is a real history of mans beginning.

Yes, but as an atheist writer (I can't recall the name) said in a debate a few years ago: "the fact that the Spiderman comics and movies are set in New York City, and future archaeologists could prove the existence of New York and artifacts mentioned in Spiderman, does not prove that Spiderman was a real superhero who received superhuman "spidey" abilities after a lab test gone horribly wrong." And the point is that the existence of cities or other artifacts mentioned in the Bible, does not count as evidence for the supernatural claims, unless they produce evidence of a worldwide flood occurring 4000 years ago, the parting of the Red Sea, or that millions of Israelites wandered around the Sinai for 40 years.

The problem with biblical archaeology is that for years, archaeologists such as Yigael Yadin just conducted their excavations and research with the intention of finding evidence for Biblical stories. Some things referenced in the Bible can be cross-reference, but everything that could not be verified was just left unmentioned. That is why modern Israeli archaeologists such as Israel Finkelstein, who openly declares that there is no physical evidence for Conquest of Canaan and other important beliefs in Jewish culture, finds himself receiving countless death threats, and his work being interfered with by rightwing Israeli politicians. It's remarkably similar to an event 10 or 15 years ago, when a Japanese anthropologist discovered a site which proved that the present day Japanese are descended from Koreans who arrived many centuries back -- his site was closed by the Government, and he was ordered off the property and threatened with prosecution...all because his work threatened the reality of the Japanese founding myth in their Shinto religion. A similar crisis is at work in Israel between Orthodox fundamentalists and secularists, who want a separation between science and mythology.

i agree with you on that. farming methods ....let me just say that we should be able to do much better! For a supposed intelligent species, we can be really foolish...we are destroying our own environment in the name of progress! That doest give me much hope in the human race .

I'm with you on this one! If we continue our present energy and resource use, it can only come at the expense of the poorest 2 billion people in the world, who are dying from starvation and malnourishment.