Voices
in
Japan

poll

Which side is more insulting to the other: pro-whalers or anti-whalers?

29 Comments
© Japan Today

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

29 Comments
Login to comment

I voted 'anti-whalers'. The pro-whalers can do no better than fluster and bumble ineffectually about 'eco-terrorism' and 'piracy', while those of us on the side of the whales have so much more material to work with and get our teeth into.

I will continue to insult the pro-whalers, and of course the unspeakable whalers themselves, until Japan comes to its senses and the barbarity ceases.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The whalers virtually beg to be insulted.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They are both about the same.

If only we could arrange for both groups to continue the 'debate' somewhere far out at sea.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am in favour of sustainable whaling, after all a whale is nothing more than a big fish.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What a bizarre question. I mean, it seems to me SeaShepherd does a better job of hurling insults, but the existence of the whalers is far more insulting to anyone. I think it needs to be phrased better.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Actually I believe a whale is nothing more than a big mammal, like an elephant with fins. The whalers insult everyone by claiming to be doing research, by claiming Japan has a long history of whaling (they do, within eye-shot of Japan), and by being part of a nation that has overfished its own sea into unproductivity. So I voted Both because the other side is pretty good at tossing insults, too.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The poll should have read: "which side's arguments are more insulting to your intelligence?" Whatever neither side makes a convincing case and I just try to block it out. There are certainly more important issues facing the world than whaling.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I will continue to insult the pro-whalers, and of course the unspeakable >whalers themselves, until Japan comes to its senses and the barbarity >ceases.

I hope someone who thinks lettuce has emotions stalks and harasses you day in and day out. Perhaps that would permit you to understand what the other party feels.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ossan: "I hope someone who thinks lettuce has emotions stalks and harasses you day in and day out. Perhaps that would permit you to understand what the other party feels."

Thinking is the mental and living equivalent of a head of lettuce is what gets people like you the wrath of so many world-wide (I'm not saying this site, fine as it is... nudge nudge... is read world-wide or anything); you can't understand the difference between cruelly slaughtering an endangered mammal and picking up a head of lettuce from the earth. You're really undermining your own intelligence here.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith

There are those who believe that Whales are nothing more than cows in the water. Then there are those who believe that whales are holy creatures with the same degree of everything as humans. Nothing exists to definitively resolve this question one way or the other. When one imposes their own set of beliefs upon others to the extent of villifying them and wishing them harm, well I say there is a moral vacuum. Is that what we were taught as children? Sorry smith but you're are out in society's left field supporting criminal behavior.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

you can't understand the difference between cruelly slaughtering an endangered mammal and picking up a head of lettuce from the earth.

"Plants do not think in the way humans do, but they do take in information and respond to it. Plants take cues from their environment to ‘decide’ when to send up shoots, set buds or abscise leaves. Some plants react to attacks by predators by releasing chemical warning signals that are sensed by other plants in the area. Scientists are debating whether these reactions should be considered intelligent"

http://www.ubcbotanicalgarden.org/weblog/000685.php

http://aob.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/92/1/1

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/10/veggie_intelligence

0 ( +0 / -0 )

will continue to insult the pro-whalers, and of course the unspeakable >whalers themselves, until Japan comes to its senses and the barbarity >ceases.

When one imposes their own set of beliefs upon others to the extent of villifying them and wishing them harm, well I say there is a moral vacuum. Is that what we were taught as children?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

wishing them harm

I don't wish the whalers harm. I just want them to go home, stop all this 'scientific research' and 'traditional culture' nonsense, and get proper jobs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Is that what we were taught as children?

As a child I was taught that deliberately inflicting pain and suffering on a living creature was where the moral vacuum lay.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Weather the whales have feelings or not, Japan eats fish. This is their life and tradition.

It is not for us to interfere into THEIR (Japanese) affairs.

Who is it to say that whales are off limits? Japanese have rights too!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

If the Japanese were whaling within their own waters that would be a Japanese affair, but the fact that they are not in Japanese waters and also are a part of the treaty protecting the whales makes this a global issue. Also the fact that they are part of the treaty meant to protect the whales makes it very hypocritical on their part. For being known as such a "green" and "sustainable" culture, it is strange that the Japanese seem so bent on harvesting endangered species.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No you see, they're avoiding harvesting endangered species, but instead using a managed approach...

Ah who cares, I won't convince you, you won't convince me. Since I'm right and you're wrong, does it even matter. :)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

cleo

I don't wish the whalers harm. I just want them to go home, stop all >this 'scientific research' and 'traditional culture' nonsense, and get >proper jobs.

I'm glad to hear that. So then can I take it that you are against the physical harassment and provocation activities of Sea Sheperd? After all, Greenpeace and other groups are also against whaling as well without resorting to blatant criminal activity.

As a child I was taught that deliberately inflicting pain and suffering >on a living creature was where the moral vacuum lay.

I believe that Whalers are human beings and they are living creatures.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

can I take it that you are against the physical harassment and provocation activities of Sea Sheperd?

Provocation is fine. The whalers are provoking the rest of the civilised world with their blatant lies and antics. If the whalers feel provoked when people object to their bloody occupation, all well and good. May it give them pause to think about what they're doing. As for 'physical harassment' - you mean like turning high-pressure water cannon on people in flimsy inflatable dinghies, with the very strong possibility of knocking someone into the icy water? Firing long range acoustical devices designed to disorient and incapacitate? (a very dangerous thing to do considering the harsh environment) Flinging solid metal balls at cameramen? Poking boathooks in the faces of young actresses? Yes, I'm against all of those things.

Trailing behind the death ships so that they keep moving and have not time to catch whales? Fine. It's the whalers who are deciding they don't want their activities witnessed. A bit of smelly stuff on the decks, making the butchering of 'research material' a little more unpleasant than it already is? Nah. The whalers didn't choose their 'profession' for its pleasant aromas.

I believe that Whalers are human beings

So do I, and I believe they should go home, get proper jobs like responsible human beings, and live lives in which they can hold their heads up high and wash the blood and blubber off their hands and hearts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Of course, both sides are as pedantic as each other. The thing that worries me, however, is the total disregard that both sides show with regard to safety.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Provocation is fine. The whalers are provoking the rest of the civilised >world with their blatant lies and antics.

No they aren't "provoking" anybody, they're just doing their job.

If the whalers feel provoked when people object to their bloody >occupation, all well and good.

No they feel provoked when eco-terrorists throw things at them, ie; interfereing without provocation a lawful activity. And we both know it's not illegal, just ask the Australians.

May it give them pause to think about what they're doing. As >for 'physical harassment' - you mean like turning high-pressure water >cannon on people in flimsy inflatable dinghies, with the very strong >possibility of knocking someone into the icy water?

The eco-terrorists are engaging in acts of piracy, harassing by throwing objects, boarding wthout permission etc. Defending themselves with water canons is the very least they can do. If the ship were American we'd be firing live rounds. And if one of the criminal eco-terrorists falls into the water while harassing a whaling ship, so what? He was engaging in piracy.

Firing long range acoustical devices designed to disorient and >incapacitate? (a very dangerous thing to do considering the harsh >environment) Flinging solid metal balls at cameramen? Poking boathooks >in the faces of young actresses? Yes, I'm against all of those things.

Wow you buy Watson's BS hook line and sinker huh? The eco-terrorists have no business being there. Vigilantism is illegal anywhere.

Trailing behind the death ships so that they keep moving and have not >time to catch whales? Fine. It's the whalers who are deciding they don't >want their activities witnessed. A bit of smelly stuff on the decks, >making the butchering of 'research material' a little more unpleasant >than it already is? Nah. The whalers didn't choose their 'profession' >for its pleasant aromas.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Both of these groups could turn their Eco-Terrorism into Eco-Tourism. Their "scientific" barberism has me deeply insulted.

Everyone of the infidels should have their picture, address, email published so they can be harrassed to no end. -The Whale God commands it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why do people harp on this with their heart on their sleeve? Oh my God!! A few Whales are dying. Oh crap. Stop using emotion to get your way. Anti-Whalers are nothing more than emotional blackmailing terrorists and have called many a pro-whaler idiots when it's clear they are for not having any more argument than whales are poor poor animals in the ocean being harassed by humans. Bloody hypocrites all of em.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

insulting? mmm i think the pro whalers havent being insulting, if only a little. I think they could be alot more insulting if they wanted to. They barely pick any holes in the anti whalers let alone be insulting.. which they could do both easily if they tried.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

888 -

But we don't even need to try to insult the whalers. They just lay it all out on a plate for us. It's so easy....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If the IWC doesn't like the Whaling, they sure don't like Sea Sheperd either. It seems that the IWC is an organization that can pass resolutions but has zero enforecement ability with regards to any issue.

IWC Resolution 2007-2

RESOLUTION ON SAFETY AT SEA AND PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT <snip> NOW THEREFORE THE COMMISSION

AGREES AND DECLARES again that the Commission and its Contracting Governments do not condone and in fact condemn any actions that are a risk to human life and property in relation to the activities of vessels at sea;

URGES persons and entities to refrain from such acts;

FURTHER URGES Contracting Governments to have regard for the importance of protecting the environment, and in particular the fragile Antarctic environment;

URGES all Contracting Governments concerned to take appropriate measures, consistent with IMO guidelines, in order to ensure that the substance and spirit of this Resolution are observed both domestically and internationally;

URGES Contracting Governments to take actions, in accordance with relevant rules of international law and respective national laws and regulations, to cooperate [ ] to prevent and suppress actions that risk human life and property at sea and with respect to alleged offenders;

URGES Contracting Governments to cooperate in accordance with UNCLOS and other relevant instruments in the investigation of incidents at sea including those which might pose a risk to life or the environment.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cleo The topic is which side is more insulting. The IWCs position on whaling is not the issue. The IWCs position on Sea Sheperds anics are not either.

"If the IWC doesn't like the Whaling, they sure don't like Sea Sheperd either. It seems that the IWC is an organization that can pass resolutions but has zero enforecement ability with regards to any issue.

IWC Resolution 2007-2

RESOLUTION ON SAFETY AT SEA AND PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT <snip> NOW THEREFORE THE COMMISSION

AGREES AND DECLARES again that the Commission and its Contracting Governments do not condone and in fact condemn any actions that are a risk to human life and property in relation to the activities of vessels at sea;

URGES persons and entities to refrain from such acts;

FURTHER URGES Contracting Governments to have regard for the importance of protecting the environment, and in particular the fragile Antarctic environment;

URGES all Contracting Governments concerned to take appropriate measures, consistent with IMO guidelines, in order to ensure that the substance and spirit of this Resolution are observed both domestically and internationally;

URGES Contracting Governments to take actions, in accordance with relevant rules of international law and respective national laws and regulations, to cooperate [ ] to prevent and suppress actions that risk human life and property at sea and with respect to alleged offenders;

URGES Contracting Governments to cooperate in accordance with UNCLOS and other relevant instruments in the investigation of incidents at sea including those which might pose a risk to life or the environment."

Moderator: You're on the wrong thread. The topic is which side is more insulting.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I love whales and therefore I am biased for the beilef that Pro whalers are insulting. My only logical explination dispite my biased opinion is due to the fact that the Japnese whaling companies DO tread farther than they need to in terms of capturing these species.... And besides, I think anyone who has interest to stand up and preserve water life such as this deserves to be acknowledged! Go anti whalers! I admit although im an anti-whaler I'm not foregoing some of the semantics and off the wall stunts that most animal protectors go through. If its in Japanese history to eat a whale... I understand but just don't let me see it...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites