Argument Against The Whaling Banned
In this week, there was the topic from the whaling ban and the issues this caused. I chose the whaling ban because I like the animals and I’m against the violence or any harm with animals. Each paragraph answers the questions for the assignment.
I don’t agree with the Norwegian and Japanese for hunting whales as a cultural exemption. My arguments to be against this “cultural tradition” are the cruelty the whales suffer when they got kill with lethal methods such as the use of the explosive grenade. I read there are other non-lethal methods and people don’t want to use them due to the only thing to obtain data is to use the lethal methods. Also, most of the Japanese population are “anti-whaling” and few people work on this activity. (“The Japanese …show more content…
Examples of the cultural activity can be a typical dance from a region, a walking to see the pyramids from Egypt, hearing a rehearsal of the opera and many more activities. In this kind of activities, none of this involves violence to anyone or destruction of something. These activities are designed to accentuate the exclusive culture, enrich the people’s culture, join a community where they share the experience and maybe learn something new they did not before from their country or region.
Maybe the economics of the fishing village could be affected if the whaling ban stops. People would earn little or almost nothing. I think fishers could find another source as fishes or another type to sell to survive. Besides, the preservation of the whales is important because whales can almost be existent soon and would be hard to reproduce them again to have the same number or more than exist today. In the other hand, people can have other sources to sell and would still live.
I think the claims could be balanced with only thing the Japanese has to do and avoids it, respect and regulate the hunting of the whales and use non-lethal methods to kill them. People would don’t accept this because the government would want to do it but at least would be better for the whales that are the victims of this calamity known as a tradition since a long time
I don’t agree with the Norwegian and Japanese for hunting whales as a cultural exemption. My arguments to be against this “cultural tradition” are the cruelty the whales suffer when they got kill with lethal methods such as the use of the explosive grenade. I read there are other non-lethal methods and people don’t want to use them due to the only thing to obtain data is to use the lethal methods. Also, most of the Japanese population are “anti-whaling” and few people work on this activity. (“The Japanese …show more content…
Examples of the cultural activity can be a typical dance from a region, a walking to see the pyramids from Egypt, hearing a rehearsal of the opera and many more activities. In this kind of activities, none of this involves violence to anyone or destruction of something. These activities are designed to accentuate the exclusive culture, enrich the people’s culture, join a community where they share the experience and maybe learn something new they did not before from their country or region.
Maybe the economics of the fishing village could be affected if the whaling ban stops. People would earn little or almost nothing. I think fishers could find another source as fishes or another type to sell to survive. Besides, the preservation of the whales is important because whales can almost be existent soon and would be hard to reproduce them again to have the same number or more than exist today. In the other hand, people can have other sources to sell and would still live.
I think the claims could be balanced with only thing the Japanese has to do and avoids it, respect and regulate the hunting of the whales and use non-lethal methods to kill them. People would don’t accept this because the government would want to do it but at least would be better for the whales that are the victims of this calamity known as a tradition since a long time