They are killing 234,000 baby seals TODAY

[debbierlus]

This is just senseless.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/04/12/seal.hunt.ap/index.html

So, that a bunch of rich people can have a stylish coat....

If a eskimo needed to clobber a seal for clothing for his family, and to feed his family, I could understand.

But, this is just vanity and cruelty.

[acmejack]

1. There are no words for those who do this, debbierlus.

Simply disgusting...

[Beaverhausen]

2. What's stylish about wearing animal skins anyway?

This is sad and sick. :cry:

[dogday]

3. That is some sick shit nt

[movonne]

4. This makes me sick ..How could anyone do this...

[Kutjara]

5. It feeds the lust for blood...

...and lets cowards feel like heros.

After all this time, I'm still awed by the human thirst for death.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

6. Where are those skins sold?

I know lots of people who wear fur, and they've got alll kinds of coats, but I've never seen anyone in a sealskin coat.

Am I a hopeless hick?

[Beaverhausen]

9. I think Scandinavia is where they are mostly sold

[Southsideirish]

87. These are the people we should boycott.

[LeftyMom]

12. They're mostly processed in Norway

This link lists the clothing makers knows to use seal skins: http://www.hsus.org/marine_mammals/protect_seals/designers_who_use_seal_fur.html

Annika Heinadottir
Oehlenschlaegersgade 30
Copenhagen
Denmark
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Birger Christensen
Ostergade 38
DK-1100 Copenhagen K
Denmark
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Gucci

685 Fifth Ave.
New York, NY 10022
212-750-5220
[e-mail]

The Odette Leblanc Collection
022 de l'ecole Rd., Pointe-aux-Loups
Iles de la madeleine PQ. G4T 8B1
Canada
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Petit Nord OU
Pikk Tn. 67-1
10133 Tallinn
Estonia
Phone: 011 + 372 372 6411211
Fax: 011 + 372 6411212
Email: Use the form at http://www.base-1.com/petit.html

Prada World Headquarters
Prada S.P.A.
Via Andrea Maffei, 2
Milan, Italy 20154
Phone: [phone]

Prada U.S.
610 W. 52nd St.
New York, NY 10019
Phone: [phone]

Versace
Donatella Versace
Versace S.P.A. Headquarters
Via Manzoni, 38
Milan, Italy 20121
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

[Canuckistanian]

17. You probably don't know anyone who could afford one

They're VERY expensive. Probably more than fox or mink or beaver.

[LeftyMom]

24. Seal skin can't legally be sold in the US. nt

[LeftyMom]

7. It's fucking evil, isn't it? nt

[AndyA]

8. Oh my God! This is so cruel! What has happened to humanity?

There is something so very wrong with people who would do such a thing. I can't find the words to describe how I feel. This is so sad. :(

[Zynx]

10. That's just disgusting. n/t

[rpannier]

11. Absolutely vile.

[GirlinContempt]

13. What about leather?

[wtmusic]

15. One could argue

that leather is necessary for some products, where it's obvious that there are plenty of alternatives for baby seal fur.

[GirlinContempt]

18. One could argue

that leather is not necessary, or alternately, that the revenue from the seal hunt is necessary to keep atlantic canadians out of abject poverty.

[wtmusic]

19. Sure

you'd just have less of a basis for it. :)

[GirlinContempt]

22. I don't think so

Are you familiar with the economy in Atlantic Canada? Are you familiar with the products available in place of leather?

[wtmusic]

36. If you mean vinyl, yes, I've heard of it

and it doesn't replace leather.

Whales aren't particularly cute either but hunting them is 100% unnecessary. When the IWC banned hunting whales in 1982, guess what? No one starved. Whaling found other lines of work, mostly in the fishing industry. And though harp seals aren't in danger of extinction they will be endangered soon if current hunting levels continue.

onedit: the seals are not killed in accordance with the US Humane Slaughter Act, which requires a single blow or electrical shock of sufficient force to kill instantly. They're repeatedly clubbed to death. We're comparing apples and oranges.

[GirlinContempt]

39. I'll have to read up on their risk of endangerment

Cause I've never heard anything of the sort before.

I'm not for seal hunting, but I'm also not for selective cherry picking of issues.

How do faux leather products not replace leather, exactly?

[LeftyMom]

43. here you go:

http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/general/default.aspx?oid=165403

http://www.hsus.org/press_and_publications/press_releases/hunt_plus_warming_seal_disaster.html

http://www.harpseals.org/#icecondition

To sum the problem up: the seals need ice to birth and rear thier pups. The ice was incredibly poor this year, so many of the pups were spontaneously aborted at sea. The problem isn't likely to get any better due to global warming.

[ghostsofgiants]

47. Leather alternatives..

http://www.vrg.org/nutshell/leather.htm

[DenaliDemocrat]

53. Not True at all

Some Native villages up here were in very bad shape a couple of years ago because the whaling was poor that year. People starved to death. Welcome to Alaska.

[wtmusic]

126. Not talking about natives

Just the commercial hunt.

[LeftyMom]

23. About the effect of the hunt on the economy:

"Is the Seal Hunt Economically Important?

No. Sealing is an off-season activity conducted by fishermen from Canada's East Coast. They make, on average, one twentieth of their incomes from seal hunting and the rest from commercial fisheries. Even in Newfoundland, where 90% of sealers live, revenues from the hunt account for less than 1% of the province's economy and only 2% of the landed value of the fishery. According to the Newfoundland government, out of a population of half a million people, about 4,000 fishermen participate in the seal hunt each year.

The commercial seal hunt is an activity that Canada's federal government could easily replace with economic alternatives, should it choose to do so.

Does the Government Subsidize the Hunt?

Yes. According to reports from the Canadian Institute for Business and the Environment, more than $20 million in subsidies were provided to the sealing industry between 1995 and 2001. Those subsidies came from entities such as the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Human Resources Development Council, and Canada Economic Development–Quebec. These subsidies take a variety of forms, including funding the salaries for seal processing plant workers, market research and development trips, and capital acquisitions for processing plants.

Moreover, Canada's commercial seal hunt is also indirectly subsidized by the Norwegian government. A Norwegian company purchases close to 80% of the sealskins produced in Canada in any given year through its Canadian subsidiary. These skins are shipped in an unprocessed state directly to Norway, where they are tanned and re-exported. The Norwegian government provides significant financial assistance to this company each year. "

http://www.hsus.org/marine_mammals/protect_seals/about_the_canadian_seal_hunt/index.html

I agree that leather is unneeded, but it really has nothing to do with this (since you're comparing a farmed animal killed primarily for other reasons with a wild one killed almost exclusively for the value of it's skin.) However if you really want to start a discussion about the use of leather in another thread I'd be happy to bring my thoughts on the subject.

[GirlinContempt]

30. My point is more

that people freak about seals, but not about millions of other animals that are killed for essentially the same reasons.

Seals are cute. That's what it seems to boil down to for many people, and thats just stupid.

$14 million dollars into a province that holds around 11% of all the countries poor is economically important, period.

[LeftyMom]

32. Yeah, I'd prefer people showed compassion for all animals

but the seal hunt is as good a place to start as any.

The Canadian government spends more on the seal hunt than the sale of pelts and penises generates. More money still is lost because of the boycott of Canadian seafood in protest of the hunt. The seal hunt provides a few seasonal jobs. It's nothing to base an economy around, but even if it were that's no justification for the horrific deaths of so many animals already threatned by global warming and the loss of the ice floes that constitutes thier birthing area.

[GirlinContempt]

35. I've never heard that before

Any sources that the gov. spends more on the hunt than the hunt brings in?

[GirlinContempt]

33. 4. . Isn't sealing an important economic activity for an economically disa

disadvantaged group?

The economic value of the seal hunt is another one of those things that is open to interpretation. The federal government says the landed value of seals was $16.5 million in 2004, providing a "significant" source of income for thousands of sealers – benefiting them and their families at a time when, according to the DFO, "other fishing options are unavailable, or limited at best, in many remote, coastal communities."

That amounts to a fraction of the $600-million Newfoundland fishery. But for some sealers, it represents up to a third of their annual income. And in a province with jobless rates north of 15 per cent, they say that means even more.

from cbc.ca

[LeftyMom]

37. The hunt operates at a loss and inspires a boycott that threatens

Newfoundland's primary source of income. It would make more economic sense to set those few men to work digging ditches or just cut than to kill so many young seals.

It's not about the money though, it's about bloodlust and being stubborn in the face of international opposition. Otherwise when private citizens offered to replace the income the seal hunt brings in those men would have stayed home and cashed in rather than choosing to grab thier hakapiks and hit the floes.

[GirlinContempt]

94. You're right, that WOULD make more economic sense

if it were true.

[LWolf]

25. Leather

comes from animals mass produced and processed to provide meat to American grocery stores. As long as people eat red meat, there will be animal skins. Should they be composted instead of tanned?

Who are these seals feeding?

[ghostsofgiants]

27. Might not be as common as beef, but people do eat seal meat.

Smells nasty when it's cooking though. Blech.

[GirlinContempt]

31. They do indeed

[fortyfeetunder]

123. What about baby seal meat?

Probably not as aged as an older one. But still what's the point of killing them?

[LWolf]

129. I know some people do. That's not why they are

killing these seals, though, is it?

[LittleClarkie]

63. Eh, fuck em. Cows are ugly.

Reminds me of a Dennis Leary routine where he talks about dolphins getting caught in tuna nets. He asked, "What about the tunas?" "Oh, fuck them. They're ugly. We only care about the dolphins."

[SlipperySlope]

156. Re: What about leather?

It is good for making shoes, belts, furniture, and clothing.

Full-grain, top-grain, full-aniline leather is considered the most luxurious, but it doesn't resist stains or scratches very well.

You may want to consider a semi-aniline (protected) leather instead.

In general, you should stay away from split leather for any application where strength is required (like the seating surfaces on a sofa).

Be aware: bicast leather is effectively a synthetic product with some animal components. Do not purchase it if you want the real thing.

[wtmusic]

14. I bet Cheney wishes he could clobber a few

sick bastard.

[leftchick]

16. Here is one of The Best Organizations At The Slaughter

I joined IFAW 20 years ago and they are still fighting these rat bastards...

http://www.stopthesealhunt.ca/atf/cf/{1AE979E3-67B2-4AC0-A26D-17D11CF1EAB6}/left_seal_top_2006.jpg

Donation link....https://www.kintera.org/site/apps/ka/sd/donor.asp?c=dhKPI1PFIqE&b=446823&en=esJLJUPHKlLOIUMEIkLQKVPCIbLWKfPOIjISI4PPJoLUK5NRJwF

God they are beautiful and totally helpless....

[ghostsofgiants]

21. In the interest of intellectual honesty...

You might want to stop posting pictures of teh whitecoats. It's been illegal to hunt those since 1987.

I don't even support the hunt, but I do support intellectual honesty.

[leftchick]

26. go to the link and post the other pics

there are plenty of both. And wtf difference does it make? For the sake of "intellectual honesty" a seal is a seal! :eyes:

[ghostsofgiants]

29. It's used to elicit an emotional reaction rather than a rational one...

Like I said, I'm not a supporter of the hunt. I've signed petitions against it. But using pictures of whitecoats, which is done quite often, is dishonest.

[leftchick]

34. here you go ..........*graphic*!

http://www.stopthesealhunt.com/atf/cf/{1AE979E3-67B2-4AC0-A26D-17D11CF1EAB6}/S-03-86_carcasses_x.jpg

they still were baby seals, just a few weeks older.

:cry:

[ghostsofgiants]

38. Yes, that is disgusting. And more honest.

And as I've said, I don't support the hunt. I'm just asking for some honesty. Is that so wrong?

[leftchick]

41. I posted this one earlier

is that honest enogh for you? Parse all you want the end result is the same 250,000 seals dying a horribly cruel death.

http://www.stopthesealhunt.ca/atf/cf/{1AE979E3-67B2-4AC0-A26D-17D11CF1EAB6}/left_seal_top_2006.jpg

[ghostsofgiants]

42. Yes, and do you hear me complaining about that one?

My issue was with the whitecoat. I've already stated why. I've already stated that despite my disdain for the dishonesty behind using pictures of whitecoats to elicit an emotional response that I am in no way a supporter of the seal hunt. What more do you want?

[leftchick]

48. you seem to imply it is worse to kill an infant

than a toddler in human terms? That is what I find aggravating about your argument. The seals allowed to be legally slaughtered are only a few weeks older than the white coats you find so offensive to post. I don't see any difference at all. So we don't agree.

[ghostsofgiants]

55. I'm not implying anything, you're making inferrences.

I never once said (or implied) that it's worse to kill them than it is any of the other seals Like I explicitly stated I DON'T SUPPORT THE FUCKING HUNT AT ALL. However, since it is illegal to hunt the whitecoats, I don't think it's honest to use them to try and convince those who would be inclined to think it's worse to kill the whitecoats of your position. I have nothing against showing the ones that are actually being killed as a means to demonstrate how fucked up it can be. That is fine.

Excuse me if I prefer to approach an issue with facts and honesty rather than by plucking people's heartstrings.

[leftchick]

57. dead babies

dead adults, no difference. Sorry, Dead is dead.

[ghostsofgiants]

71. Would you post a picture of an infant or even a man, for example...

As a victim of Ted Bundy? No, because that's not who he killed. Doesn't make it any less fucked up, but it's honest.

[leftchick]

77. you do like to parse don't you?

what is the age difference detween a whitecoat and a baby seal legally allowed to be slaughtered? You still haver not addressed that. We are talking WEEKS here not years. And as I said before dead is dead!

[ghostsofgiants]

106. Um, you're the one who said...

"dead babies, dead adults, no difference."

So I was using an analogy closer to what you were saying.

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 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. But the reality is that whitecoats can't be hunted anymore. But 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.

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

Fuck, why do I even bother? We're not even talking about the same shit here. I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT KILLING THEM IS NOT GOOD NO MATTER HOW OLD THEY ARE! However, I'm talking about having your propaganda (I'm not using that in a pajorative sense, by the way) reflect reality.

[Alamom]

20. Any animal skin or print can be made from synthetic material and

it looks real.....the rich want the real thing.

This is sick as is raising minks for coats and passing off dog and cat skin/fur for other, more desirable furs.


It's all sick, sick, sick......









edit:spelling

[leftchick]

28. "Fur Is Not a Fabric"

my favorite tshirt.

[Catchawave]

40. "Fur is Dead"

http://www.furisdead.com/feat-harpseal.asp

[Beaverhausen]

45. I like her more and more all the time

[BlooInBloo]

44. They're animals - who cares?

I think anthropomorphizing animals is silly.

[Beaverhausen]

46. I guess you don't care, but lots of us do

I care about all living beings on this planet. I'm weird that way.

[LeftyMom]

49. Nobody's assigning human traits to the seals

We know they suffer and feel pain. We also know that thier future is threatned by global warming and the loss of sea ice.

Do you have a point or did you just feel the need to show the world what an uncaring person you are for lack of anything better to do?

P.S. You're an animal too. Does that mean I can make a coat of your babies?

[BlooInBloo]

51. They most certainly are assigning personal traits to them...

... most specifically, moral agency. Which is nothing more than pure silliness.

I'm an animal, but I'm also something more than an animal - I'm a person. And my babies (hypothetically) are people-in-training. So no.

Animals (in the lay sense) are JUST animals - nothing more. In particular, they aren't people. And hence don't have a seat at the "morality table", and hence eating, killing, of them isn't a moral problem.

I apologize if this thread was intended for ONLY those who agreed with the OP. I thought it was like other threads on DU where people were allowed to disagree. My mistake.

[LeftyMom]

56. Have you ever looked a seal in the eye?

Spend some time up close with them and then come back and tell me they should die so that greedy and immoral humans can make coats of thier flesh.

Moreover, I find the idea that animals can be abused and exploited simply because they aren't people reprehensible. That sort of othering is also used throughout history and right up to the modern day to justify atrocities against people who aren't really people in the eyes of thier abusers.

There is no clear demarcation between humans and animals. Some creatures are smarter than others but all have innate worth and the capacity to suffer.

[leftchick]

58. you can not force empathy on a human

some have it, a lot do not.

[LeftyMom]

61. Sadly true.

I believe the figures I've seen place about 3% of the human population as being pathologically incapable of compassion. Seems like it's more than that lately- perhaps Bush has inspired his heard-hearted brethren to stop trying to fake it.

[entanglement]

113. Not only incapable of compassion - I suspect they also RELISH cruelty

n/t

[BlooInBloo]

64. (shrug) I don't "empathize" with rocks, blades of grass,...

.. bottle caps, and a whole host of things.

I do emphathize with people though.

(Shrug) Some folks you can't teach the particular dignity of personhood... Some prefer to believe that people are no more than animals....

[LeftyMom]

67. If you fail to see the distinction between a rock and a seal

You need a remedial science class.

[BlooInBloo]

70. And if you fail to see the difference between a seal and a person...

You need a remedial ethics class.

[LeftyMom]

75. I read a lot of ethics

A seal is an intelligent mammal. A person is a more intelligent mammal. There's no clear line of demarcation, just a matter of degree.

[BlooInBloo]

78. The willfully blind.....

Seals cannot get married.
Seals cannot sue in court.
Seals cannot immigrate.
Seals cannot be hired or fired.

etc.

There's a very clear demarcation between people and non-people. Which you and people like you, as far as I can tell, wish would disappear.

[LeftyMom]

80. No shit.

However, seals can feel pain. They suffer. They care about thier young. They know fear.

To harm them knowingly is immoral.

[BlooInBloo]

82. Non sequitor.

To harm *people* knowingly is immoral.

I suspect we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

By the way: How do you know they care about their young? Or that they know fear? Is it because they exibit people-like behavior in the relevant circumstances?

Tell me again you don't anthropomorphize them?

[entanglement]

102. They feel PAIN

It's not about anthropomorphizing them. And yeah, you descended from an ape just like the rest of us.

edited

[BlooInBloo]

109. So what?

And I know know about you, but I believe apes are my COUSINS, not my great-grandparents. We had a COMMON ancestor.

How do you know they feel pain? You unskillfully chose to ignore that simple question - which is a fair one, given your claim. Do you know this because they act like people do when people feel pain? And yet you're not anthropomorphizing them?

[entanglement]

115. Here are some links about pain perception in mammals

http://articles.animalconcerns.org/ar-voices/archive/pain.html

Even fish feel pain:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2983045.stm

Stop justifying cruelty. Act like the 'superior' human being you claim to be!

[BlooInBloo]

117. But.... I never disagreed that they feel pain.....

... Can you find a spot where I claimed they don't feel pain?

:shrug:

What I took to be at issue was the RELEVANCE of their ability to feel pain - not the fact of the matter.

[entanglement]

118. Well, you asked me for proof and I provided it

Here, I quote you

"How do you know they feel pain? You unskillfully chose to ignore that simple question - which is a fair one, given your claim"

Anyhow, your behavior is suspiciously trollish, so I'll end this conversation here.

[BlooInBloo]

119. Oooo - I get it....

Sorry - my poor choice of question words...

I didn't mean "how do you know" in the "I don't believe you, prove to me it's true" sense.

I meant "how do you know" in the sense of "what are the typical ways in which we make that judgement".

See the difference?

[Runcible Spoon]

121. Your aguments are ridiculous/

all of the examples you gave for ranking humans above animals are social constructs, and many of them tend to vary cross-culturally. There are VERY FEW universals that are relevant to humans, and the ones I would (all humans organize according to family/clan, use naming systems, organize labor according to gender to name the ones I can think of immediately) are irrelevant to treating animals poorly. In addition, I could even argue that some of those cultural universals justify sexism, but I don't. My point is, all this bitching and moaning about anthropomorphizing of animals is irrelevant, primarily because WE anthropomorphize ourselves, it's a circular argument, caring for people and animals is part of cultural variation, and if it eases suffering for any party involved without causing too much for others, then fabulous, what's the fucking problem?

[BlooInBloo]

122. ROFLMAO!!!! "We anthropomorphize ourselves"!!!

Most ridiculous statement ever uttered in the history of human language.

LOL - I'll be back - I gotta show 'the gang' this one!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Just so I tell the story right: Do you even know what "anthropomorphize" means?

LOLOLOL

At some point when you actual learn how to think seriously, it would be helpful for you to learn the abstract difference between people and human beings.

[Runcible Spoon]

137. don't be idiotic.

when I say "we anthropomorphize ourselves" I mean to say it is circular logic, that we construct reality to please ourselves. But thanks for being disingenuous and ignoring my points. :eyes:

[BlooInBloo]

140. SWEET! You DO know what it means!

Hence you know how ridiculous a statement it is, and yet you said it ANYWAY!

Thank you!


anthropomorphize

treat nonhuman thing as human: to give a nonhuman thing a human form, human characteristics, or human behavior
our tendency to anthropomorphize wild animals

Microsoft® Encarta® 2006. © 1993-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.


LOLOLOL

[Runcible Spoon]

141. if all you're going to do is throw dictionary definitions, forget it.

I could debate this til the cows come home but you don't even address the crux of the issue. I meant anthropomorphize as a process to which human values are assigned, and believe me, HUMANS MUST go through that process as well...perhaps a better phrase is "attach personhood". So if your only problem with my argument is word choice, I can't do much after the fact. We are not born as "people", we become people through complex processes that vary cross culturally. If all you want to do is mince semantics and use juvenile sarcasm and avoid my points, then this discussion is a fucking waste of time. Enjoy your lonely, cynical existence. sheesh.

[BlooInBloo]

147. LOL. Outta 30-ish posts, ONE definition....

counts for you as "all going to do"?

:rofl:


Hmmm... I take it there's a thead-level-nesting limit here?

[Runcible Spoon]

149. pretty much, fun-boy..

the more words you use, the less you actually say...maybe you could go volunteer at your local animal shelter for a day..just make sure they keep you supervised and out of the "back room"..I wouldn't want you to enjoy your "charity work" too much..me, I'm going to go for a nice walk outside...

[BlooInBloo]

124. Ooops - my reply went to the wrong place... #122 was sposed to be for you

my bad.

[Thtwudbeme]

131. I hope you don't own any pets.

I also hope that you don't believe what you are posting; that you are just here to agitate.

If you can't understand being a steward of the earth, and the importance of all living creatures--then somewhere you lost a part of your soul.

There was a Psychology Today article on the "Ice People." Google it.

I wouldn't trade places with you for a million dollars.

[entanglement]

You're spewing typical RW crap

That being kind to animals automatically implies disrespect for humans. Just as they claim gays getting married somehow threatens straight couples.

[BlooInBloo]

103. Wow. Now I'm a homophobe because I think more.....

... of people than I do of animals.

You guys are so wacky you're lovable.

:hug:

Keep in mind tho, yours only gets 2nd place - person in other thread actually implied I was a nazi....

[Thtwudbeme]

132. no, dear. You people that can't understand an analogy are so wacky

that you aren't cute at all.

I don't think you are a nazi, or a homophobe. I think you are a skinwalker--no soul. And I feel sorry for you.

[BlooInBloo]

133. Right back atcha!

I feel sorry for all of you who think so little of people that their worth is no greater than an animal's. Indeed you don't even recognize a difference between people and mere animals.

Realizing that so many of you feel this way, however, does make it easier to understand how the country has ended up so low. Not the whole cause off course, just one piece of the puzzle.


EDIT: Clarified first sentence.

[Thtwudbeme]

138. Find a post of mine that says I think animals are more important that

people.

You are a sad little person. I really do feel for you; you seem to not value animal life--and you either can't read or just make things up as you go along--your reality must be seriously skewed.

[BlooInBloo]

139. Your literacy abilities are lacking...

... I never claimed you think that animals are more important than people.

Boy, you people-are-worth-no-more-than-animals folks don't score so high on the reading section of tests, it seems.

[Thtwudbeme]

144. I care very much about people. I have noticed that the worse crimes

against humanity though, are usually done by those that also showed a lack of interest in the basic rights or comforts of animals.

More than likely, you are the one on this thread who really doesn't care about people.

Good luck to you--and whatever karma you pick up in this life.

[Runcible Spoon]

145. don't even bother, sweetie.

I'm at the end of my patience with this one. Apparently some think people are born with a finite amount of compassion, and it must be parceled out, usually only to others who share the same twisted worldview as they do (Repukes, for example).

[Thtwudbeme]

146. Oh, I think it's worse than that

Psychology Today had an article last year called "The Ice People." Google it; it's scary as hell.

I have always called these people "Skinwalkers."

I disagree with you; I think some people have no compassion to parcel out. I think they LIKE some people, and enjoy the company of others---but, if something happened to their friends, or family...other than feeling the pain of their OWN loss...they wouldn't really be able to care.

There are more and more of these people being born, too--

Sad for us, sad for the animals, sad for the earth itself.

[Runcible Spoon]

148. that was creepy beyond words...

I think your "skinwalker" term is dead on...:scared: Reminded me of American PSycho...and even in the book, it's implied that he never actually killed anyone, and that to him, that was his real failure, his "losing the game"...maybe our little "friend" here wants to "return some video tapes"...

[Thtwudbeme]

150. Right there with you!

These people completely creep me out. I have compassion for them; I have compassion for this poster---my God, that could have been me born with that horrible handicap--but, I don't want to meet them, or deal with them in real life.

[Runcible Spoon]

153. from the article: (advice for both of us :)

"DO NOT JOIN THE GAME. Intrigue is a sociopath's tool. Resist the temptation to compete with a seductive sociopath, to outsmart him, psychoanalyze or even banter with him. Instead of reducing yourself to his level, focus on protecting yourself"

-Take care Thtudbeme..I think I'm going to leave this thread now...:hug:

[BlooInBloo]

151. Still begging the question...

Of whether or not what's permissible treatment of mere animals is (or is not) permissible treatment of people.

I say NOT - that it is permissible to treat animals in ways in which it is NOT permissible to treat people.

It's YOU folks who think that permissible treatment is EQUAL between mere animals and people. And thus you attempt to lower people to the level of mere animals. And that IS sad. It speaks to a fundamental pessimism you folks feel about people - that we can never be anything more, or have any more value than, mere animals. Sad indeed.


It now occurred to me that it's likely that you folks are among those who don't understand the correct meaning of the phrase "begs the question", and misuses it on a regular basis. My apologies.

[Thtwudbeme]

152. Good luck with everything

I really don't want to interact with you anymore. You are an odd person, and quite frankly give me the creeps.

btw--you are the first person I have written this to--ever. On DU (been here 5 years) or anywhere else.

[Runcible Spoon]

143. wow if that's not a low blow I don't know what is.

LISTEN UP: this country is LOW because neocon Republicans and complicit groups have categorically denied the value of ANY life, human, animal, plant, whatever. I don't understand why you try to extend this specious argument that caring about animals and valuing them above commodity status implies that one can't value human life as well. Disingenuos, hamfisted, poorly constructed rhetoric. You really need to get out into the fucking world and learn a few things about how humans actually live and believe before you irresponsibly throw blame around here, one of the few placed on the WWW where people actually DO give a flying rat's ass about humanity.

[BlooInBloo]

62. Does at a zoo count?

van Bentham is not God on the matter, though everybody seems to like to ape him on the suffering bit...

I disagree with your premise - I think exploitation and abuse are concepts that apply to people, and don't apply to animals. It isn't possible to "abuse" an animal any more than one can "abuse" a rock.

What I find intellectually reprehensible is that because bad people have misused the distinction between people and animals in the past, you therefore conclude that there is no distinction AT ALL - that's the cheap, lazy, and thoughtless way to answer (better: "answer") the question.

Going the flip way, your thinly-veiled implication that someone who doesn't agree with you about animals is Hitler-esque is reprehensible as well.

[LeftyMom]

66. The ones in captivity seem rather beaten down by comparison

I find your assertion that one can't abuse an animal appalling. First, abuse of animals is legally recognized as a crime and is in many places a felony. An animal is a feeling creature and not a thing.

Are you really suggesting that if you saw a neighbor beating thier dog, poisoning cats or dragging a chicken behind the bumper of thier car you'd think no less of them? Because if you are, you really ought to be evaluated.

[BlooInBloo]

73. Sure - but that's not a moral issue...

I'd think less of someone beating their rock too.... (no jokes about the unfortunate phrasing please :) )

[LeftyMom]

79. Seek diagnosis and treatment

If you really do feel that way, you really do need immediate professional intervention, because that's a sign of a rather serious psychological issue.

[BlooInBloo]

83. Au contraire... what requires treatment...

Are folks who think animals are people. That shit's just insane.


EDIT: How insulting, how anti-human of you and folks like you to think of people as being of no more moral worth than earthworms. And then you think *I* need treatment - ROFL! It is the fundamental DISrespect of personhood that allows people to kill other people. It is people who ERASE the demarcation between people and animals that allow the military tactic of DEMONIZING or DEHUMANIZING other people to work. I fight for that line to remain - that the dignity of people be recignized and celebrated.

[Critters2]

101. Most people's children are "people in training", but...

That requires being raised by adults with a sense of empathy...

[BlooInBloo]

110. Um, yah......

You have a keen eye for the obvious...

(shrug)

[Critters2]

111. Um, you don't

Read the post again, Mr. "I don't care 'bout no animals".

[ghostsofgiants]

50. There are thousands of Japanophile teenagers who would disagree.

:evilgrin:

[BlooInBloo]

52. (watches comment fly overhead too fast to catch)

[ghostsofgiants]

59. Haha...

http://snowsuit.deviantart.com/gallery/ and things of the sort.

[BlooInBloo]

76. gotcha! Good to know of this genre!

[ghostsofgiants]

107. To be honest, I wish I didn't know of it...

*shudder*

They can be creepy.

[name not needed]

136. Most of them 12 years old.

[Ladyhawk]

65. I think claiming animals can't feel pain or fear is silly.

We all share common ancestry. I've raised too many parrots to believe that humans are the only thinking, feeling species. Parrots are extremely intelligent and they branched off from our line before the Mesozoic.

Besides, I wouldn't want to live in a world without seals. I enjoy watching the harbor seals and sea lions on the coast. Studies are showing that sea lions are one of the world's smartest animals and I'm sure the other pinnipeds--otarids and phocids, both--are also pretty brainy.

I've studied zoology and natural history enough to know that claiming sentience for humans alone is a stupid supposition. I've also studied human nature enough to know I don't want to have anything to do with people who make such suppositions.

[BlooInBloo]

84. So do I. Good thing I never did.

You may want to find a decent dictionary, and look up "sentience" and "sapience".

Wow - you're even more extreme than the others. You'd actually rather die than live in a seal-less world.

I suspect it isn't possible for anyone to get anywhere with logic with you...

[flvegan]

93. You first.

Grab that "decent dictionary" and convince others of the non-sentience of animals.

You can buy in and enjoy, back and support all the bludgeoning you want, but if you're going to drag that tired, weak shit out, I hope you have something behind it.

[BlooInBloo]

95. Wow. Even English escapes you apparently....

How can I put this?

I
never
claimed
animals
to
be
non-sentient.

Does vertical help your disability at all?

[flvegan]

97. Your

passive-aggressive allusions escape me. Rather, the reasons for them do so. Seems sort of a waste of time.

[BlooInBloo]

99. LOL! I just don't understand.....

... why you keep telling me to convince people of something I never professed to believe myself in the first place.

Oh well.

[flvegan]

104. You had me at

"I just don't understand"

Again, obviously.

[flvegan]

81. I do.

I think supporting or turning a blind eye to cruelty of any kind is shitty.

I'd go with your alleged "silly" over shitty any day.

[Southsideirish]

89. Who cares about you, a-hole?

[BlooInBloo]

116. Hm. Oh I get it. You're the posterchild....

... for what happens when the distinction between people and animals disappears.

Gotcha!

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

134. Wow. There's no possible reply to this other than

pointing at your post, shaking one's head in disgust, and saying "wow."

Wow.

[file83]

54. I wonder if Dick Cheney will be up there "helping" with his shotgun...

...maybe he'll "miss" and "accidently" shoot some these seal killers. I hope they get Dick good'n'drunk before they let him loose on the tundra.

[Gregorian]

60. Sometimes I think DU is the only sane place on the planet.

The rest appear to be thoughtless, careless, selfish, blind idiots.

War is good. Mexicans are taking over America. Bashing a living being to death with a club is just fine.

Meanwhile, everything that is sane and good has dwindled to near nothing.

Honestly, none of this affects me in any real way. I find it so strange that the very people who should care the most, and who are affected the most, don't care. And people like me who have lives of total ease and comfort, who do care.

I'm hurt to my innermost core. Every blow to those animals is a blow to me. And I'm angry. And offended.

[Ladyhawk]

68. And then you read comments like the one above...sigh.

Not you btw. :hug: I automatically add animal haters to my /ignore list. My family and their friends are filled with such people and their morality toward humans is pretty questionable, too.

[Guaranteed]

69. Does anyone eat the meat?

Do they use the rest of the animal?

[LeftyMom]

72. Mostly the seals' bodies are left on the ice

Many slip away into the sea to die (there are no numbers for dead but unskinned seals from the Canadian hunt, but in a similar hunt in Greenland, the proportion is about half) and are not counted in the official death toll as well.

"On the other hand, seal meat sales are not going as well for Canada. Seal meat is generally considered to be inedible and unfit for human consumption. While there is a small market in Newfoundland for the seal flippers (for seal flipper pie), most of the rest of the very small amount of meat found in the slaughtered seal, if utilized at all, would be purchased by pet food and fur farm industries. In 2004, only Taiwan and South Korea purchased seal meat.

Clearly Canada is not satisfied with the underperformance of seal meat sales as according to their own website, they continue to spend tax-payers money to try to peddle seal meat and are still seeking more places to sell the seal meat:

Finding a market for seal meat outside of Newfoundland continues to present a major challenge for the sealing industry. The amount of seal meat landed in 2002 was extremely low, in part because the hunt was mainly directed at younger animals (beaters), which have very little recoverable meat.

Canada, however, is optimistic about the prospects of sales of seal oil and is looking to increase their sales in this area. The way they are doing that is by falsely promoting seal oil capsules as a healthy source of Omega-3 (an essential fatty acid). As they report on their website:

The market for seal oil remains positive. Presently, a good percentage of seal oil is finding its way into areas other than the traditional marine and industrial oils. The industry is positive about this new development but is aware that more R&D is required to expand the range of products derived from seal oil."

http://www.seashepherd.org/seals/seals_seal_hunt_facts.html

Mostly only the pelts and penises are recovered, the rest is left to slip into the ocean, where the degradation of the bodies contributes to bacterial growth and anoxic conditions that harm commercial fish stocks.

[Ladyhawk]

74. I don't know. Those would be fair questions.

However, the sheer number seems like a problem to me.

I'm not completely against killing animals. I'm against cruelty and wastefulness and causing unwarranted suffering. Yes, I believe animals can suffer. Anyone who doesn't believe that hasn't been paying attention.

[Harper_is_Bush]

85. 25 MILLION CHICKENS KILLED IN US TODAY.

9 Billion divided by 365 = 25 million (rounded up since the figure was from 2004)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0412300179dec30,1,4528549.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

500,000 of them were babies.

[LeftyMom]

88. You already started a thread about that.

In any case, chickens aren't threatned by global warming and thier young aren't drowning for lack of sea ice, so I don't see how the situation is analogous.

Anyhow, now that you've figured out the scale of animal slaughter, do you wish to continue to be a part of the problem or will you be abstaining from flesh foods?

[Harper_is_Bush]

91. No, the thread was about cows.

Are you suggesting I should shut up?

[LeftyMom]

92. I'm suggesting that the ethically consistent response escapes you

but I believe you're getting closer to it in spite of yourself.

[Harper_is_Bush]

98. That's a good idea though. I should start that thread.

They are killing 25,000,000 chickens TODAY (500,000 babies)

What do you think?

[LeftyMom]

100. You do realize I don't eat chicken or eggs, right?

If you're looking for an anti-sealing animal eater, look elsewhere. I'm vegan. :D

So yeah, I think that's awful. I start threads about the evils of animal agriculture all the damn time.

[Harper_is_Bush]

105. OK, let's talk about you. How is that fact relevant to the information

I provided for perspective?

[LeftyMom]

108. You asked what I think

I think the way chickens are treated is awful. So I don't eat them, nor do I eat eggs.

Does that number legitimately bother you or are you trying to make a rhetorical point?

[Harper_is_Bush]

112. About me posting a topic about chicken deaths.

Not about you're personal behavior.

I of course know your attitudes about meat consumption.

Do you think a thread about the 25,000,000 chickens killed daily would be good? Or would it deflate interest in a couple hundred thoudand seals being killed during a yearly event?

[LeftyMom]

114. I think both are aspects of the same problem

SO yeah, if you really want to talk about chickens, let's talk chickens. Start the thread.

[Southsideirish]

90. Good point. Just because the seal pups are cuter doesn't make it any

better. Nothing with a face or parents should suffer.

[wtmusic]

128. Humane slaughter

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode07/usc_sec_07_00001902----000-.html

Seal pups being clubbed to death doesn't, er, qualify. Has nothing to do with them being "cute".

[Southsideirish]

86. I circulated a petition for this cause about 30 years ago, sigh, has

nothing changed? The wonderful, aging Cleveland Amory came to our rescue back then - an old American who arrived in a pontoon boat who managed to turn things around via the media.

What the hell is with these friggin' people up there? Get a friggin' job you a-holes! A million years of bad karma to you.

[wordpix2]

96. FUCK these neanderthals---they should be left on an ice floe

[Booster]

120. How you could look one of these babies in the eyes and then

clobber it is way beyond me. We have some sick MFer's in this world.

[roguevalley]

125. i despise this shit. may the bastards who buy this burn in hell.

[MnFats]

127. "It's a great success story..." the guy says.

that's pretty damn sick

[theHandpuppet]

130. Boycott NORWAY -- save the whales AND seals!

Cut off the market and you stop the slaughter. The biggest demand for the skins of baby harp seals comes from Norway, not to mention the Norwegian thirst for slaughtering whales.

http://www.cbc.ca/nl/story/nf-hunt-front-20060412.html

[Number9Dream]

135. Humane - characterized by kindness, mercy, compassion

In the boonies of S. Vietnam, I saw the results of man's inhumanity (which most of you should never be unfortunate enough to see). I'm not someone who cringes at the sight of a few drops of blood. Yet, the videos and photos I've seen of the seal slaughter make even this old veteran disgusted and heartsick. How any so-called veterinarians can proclaim this humane is beyond me (do I smell a bribe). Humane: adj. - characterized by kindness, mercy, and compassion. How is clubbing a 20-day-old seal pup with a hakapik any less inhumane than smashing a puppy-dog on the head with a baseball bat? "

[The Stranger]

142. Kick and recommend for greatest.

[SlipperySlope]

154. Would you be happier if the coats were for the poor?

Would you be happier if the coats were going to the poor instead of the rich?

Would you be angrier if the pelts were all going to make a swimming pool cover for Bill Gates?

I personally don't see what difference it makes where the pelts are going, and don't understand why you brought up "a bunch of rich people".

[Thtwudbeme]

155. Because there isn't a market without buyers

This post is dealing with reality, not some "what if" issue. You know that poor people aren't being given seal fur coats.

However, if you want someone to play into your socio-economic non-existent fantasy: I would still be opposed to clubbing the baby seals.

And yes, I do eat vegetables.

Stephanie

[SlipperySlope]

157. Dealing with reality...

Good - your view on clubbing baby seals is independent of the socioeconomic status of the people benefiting from the pelts. At least you are consistent.

If the OP feels the same way, then it really was pointless to haul the rich into this.

And I too eat vegetables. I would find a 100% meat diet kind of boring.