Lucy
Mar 16, 2010, 05:18 AM
Thoughts, anyone?
Seal protesters miss the mark
http://www.canada.com/Seal+protesters+miss+mark/2688193/story.html
I am again puzzled. Why a small number of vocal Nanaimo residents get so upset about the East Coast seal hunt remains something I still don't understand.
This is a topic that my colleague Robert Barron, himself from the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, has written about and I echo his comments that anti-sealing protesters are motivated by nothing more than sentimentality.
And interestingly, we have no seal hunt locally. We have seals, but no seal hunt. What's the excitement about?
The latest seal-related issue arises in the parliamentary dining room, where a small number of MPs lunched on double-smoked, bacon-wrapped seal loin with port reduction and a medley of organic beets, carrots and turnips with Yukon gold potatoes, as described by the Canwest News Service.
The anti-sealing lobby called the meal "gastronomic cruelty." The position of the anti-sealing lobby is nothing less than astronomic hypocrisy.
I reiterate Robert Barron's point: To be consistent, Nanaimo anti-sealing protesters ought to be protesting at local farms and abattoirs to save livestock from daily slaughter.
It would be revealing to find out how many of these anti-sealing protesters are vegetarians. The East Coast seal hunt is no worse than what has been going on in slaughterhouses for centuries.
If the sentiment around the seal hunt arises from the industrialization of food, which still has elements of cruelty toward animals -- and people -- I understand that.
And it should be remembered that in the context of cruelty, the East Coast seal hunt is conducted in conditions a lot better than what happens in massive and mechanized slaughterhouses.
I refer anyone to the film Food Inc. should they wish to consider this point further.
And yes, part of the sealing hunt is about the pelts. So? I fail to see what's wrong with making use of seal pelts. Prove to me that using leather is wrong and should be banned and why, and maybe seal pelts can be included.
As demonstrated when former Beatle Paul McCartney tried to debate Newfoundland premier Danny Williams, the anti-sealing movement is motivated by nothing more than misplaced emotion.
McCartney was shown up in the debate as having no real knowledge about the hunt, how it is conducted, its historical context or its importance to the province and First Nations.
There always needs to be an awareness of and commitment to preventing cruelty to animals. We cannot tolerate cruelty in the ongoing necessity to provide food for our growing populations.
Cruelty means causing suffering through intent or ignorance. When an animal is killed swiftly, whether it's a seal or livestock, cruelty is not an issue.
Unfortunately, groups like PETA go too far. While the SPCA is committed to combatting cruelty, it would seem that PETA would have us living in a world where animals have rights equivalent to humans.
Animals do not and cannot have rights. A prerequisite to a right is the awareness of having that right.
In the case of the animal-human relationship, humans have an obligation to prevent cruelty. And if, as said, the seal hunt is cruel, then local anti-sealing activists, to be congruent, better get their signs and fake blood out and protest every slaughterhouse and store that sells animal products.
While we live in an era lacking in ethical considerations, the anti-sealing lobby only sows confusion in promoting a cause that fails to separate real cruelty from cheap sentiment.
Seal protesters miss the mark
http://www.canada.com/Seal+protesters+miss+mark/2688193/story.html
I am again puzzled. Why a small number of vocal Nanaimo residents get so upset about the East Coast seal hunt remains something I still don't understand.
This is a topic that my colleague Robert Barron, himself from the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, has written about and I echo his comments that anti-sealing protesters are motivated by nothing more than sentimentality.
And interestingly, we have no seal hunt locally. We have seals, but no seal hunt. What's the excitement about?
The latest seal-related issue arises in the parliamentary dining room, where a small number of MPs lunched on double-smoked, bacon-wrapped seal loin with port reduction and a medley of organic beets, carrots and turnips with Yukon gold potatoes, as described by the Canwest News Service.
The anti-sealing lobby called the meal "gastronomic cruelty." The position of the anti-sealing lobby is nothing less than astronomic hypocrisy.
I reiterate Robert Barron's point: To be consistent, Nanaimo anti-sealing protesters ought to be protesting at local farms and abattoirs to save livestock from daily slaughter.
It would be revealing to find out how many of these anti-sealing protesters are vegetarians. The East Coast seal hunt is no worse than what has been going on in slaughterhouses for centuries.
If the sentiment around the seal hunt arises from the industrialization of food, which still has elements of cruelty toward animals -- and people -- I understand that.
And it should be remembered that in the context of cruelty, the East Coast seal hunt is conducted in conditions a lot better than what happens in massive and mechanized slaughterhouses.
I refer anyone to the film Food Inc. should they wish to consider this point further.
And yes, part of the sealing hunt is about the pelts. So? I fail to see what's wrong with making use of seal pelts. Prove to me that using leather is wrong and should be banned and why, and maybe seal pelts can be included.
As demonstrated when former Beatle Paul McCartney tried to debate Newfoundland premier Danny Williams, the anti-sealing movement is motivated by nothing more than misplaced emotion.
McCartney was shown up in the debate as having no real knowledge about the hunt, how it is conducted, its historical context or its importance to the province and First Nations.
There always needs to be an awareness of and commitment to preventing cruelty to animals. We cannot tolerate cruelty in the ongoing necessity to provide food for our growing populations.
Cruelty means causing suffering through intent or ignorance. When an animal is killed swiftly, whether it's a seal or livestock, cruelty is not an issue.
Unfortunately, groups like PETA go too far. While the SPCA is committed to combatting cruelty, it would seem that PETA would have us living in a world where animals have rights equivalent to humans.
Animals do not and cannot have rights. A prerequisite to a right is the awareness of having that right.
In the case of the animal-human relationship, humans have an obligation to prevent cruelty. And if, as said, the seal hunt is cruel, then local anti-sealing activists, to be congruent, better get their signs and fake blood out and protest every slaughterhouse and store that sells animal products.
While we live in an era lacking in ethical considerations, the anti-sealing lobby only sows confusion in promoting a cause that fails to separate real cruelty from cheap sentiment.