Fantasy T.V. Whalers blowing up Sea Shepherds

Post Reply New Topic

I propose the following fantasy T.V. show. A whaling vessel equipped with 20 mm cannon blowing up the Sea Shepherds with cannon fire. If any of the Sea Shepherds live long enough to get in the water then finish them off with machine gun or rifle fire.

I dislike the Sea Shepherds a great deal. I consider them pirates and thugs and no better than the Somalian pirates that prey on commercial shipping.

I don't particularly like the idea of killing whales but I despise the Sea Shepherds more than I feel sorry for the whales.

ruveyn

Wow, why do you hate them so much ?. I think its good what they are doing, if nobody is going to take action you have to do it yourself. Talking about it obviously doesnt keep the world from decaying around us, so i support all efforts of people trying to decrease animal exploitation. Ruveyn up until this point i had a certain respect for you because of the posts you make now you just damaged that image a great deal.

These people think God Himself has appointed them wardens of the whales. I like whales well enough and I would never harm one, but whales are meat for some people.. Whatever people can take from nature is theirs by right of labor. The Sea Shepherds do not own the whales nor do they have property rights in them. If they want to take whales to a whale zoo that is fine, but they have no right to prevent others from harvesting whales on the High Seas. The High Seas are not subject authority of private individuals. The Sea Shepherds are pirates and criminals and no better than the Somalian commerce raiders.

One of these days Capt. Watson is going to get a harpoon through his gut and I, for one, will not shed a tear for him.

ruveyn

What gives people right to take from nature what they want ?. Its all based off of human culture there is no such thing as right or wrong. Only by human law is the sea shepherd wrong but human laws are not the same as the laws of physics. What makes whales lesser beings then humans try explaining that. One thing i do know is that whales are far less dangerous for this planet then humans but what does dangerous even mean. Why is it that the pollution one human life puts out onto the planet is bad, i feel that it is bad and i think i know it is bad. Why is destruction a bad thing. Right and wrong is a tricky thing to describe i would say impossible because it does not exist.

Why is hostile action against humans seen as wrong but hostile action against animals is perfectly right. Yes i get that we evolved from hunting animals but we no longer have to do it that way. seems pretty ''wrong'' to me.

Why do humans think the gods themselves appointed them to reign over this planet for their own profiteering.

Ruveyn, this offensive nonsense doesn't belong in the TV forum, it belongs in the PPR forum.

Unfortunately, I am not a moderator anymore, but I have notified them, and I am sure that they will be moving it directly.

Thank you Quatermass, I think you are correct.

Not that the TV show is a good idea, but I agree that Watson is a Cockbag Deluxe, and that sea shepherd is getting off easy in their run-ins with whaling vessels.

It's a big ocean, and maritime law allows a whole lot of violence against agressors that would never fly on land.

Especially what with there being no witnesses, evidence, etc.

It's an unfortunate trend that any movement of Passionate Believers will almost always select the most strident, abrasive, and loopy of their members to be their leader.

For example i can almost agree with about half of PETA's agenda, but due to the way they operate i would never feel right supporting them in any way.

I believe that it would be best if the delicious animals i eat were raised and slaughtered humanely, because this might make them more delicious, and because there's enough cockbaggery out there without people tormenting my dinner before it gets to my plate.

But PETA goes too far. And so does sea shepherd.

Edit: I should clarify, I am in favor of eating fish and other seafood, and as such I'm in favor of still eating it in 50 years, and my theoretical grandchildren eating it. So i favor sustainable harvest.

I don't have solutions to the problems we have with our fisheries, but I'm pretty sure Sea Shepherd's strategy is ill-conceived.

The difference between Man and Lynx and Kangaroo is that Man carries a paper saying a human authority licenses his actions.

It is necessary for survival. If we did not take the food we want from Nature we would starve to death. Nature is not a person. It owns nothing. Humans are persons and what they take from nature by their own effort is theirs. Period.

ruveyn

It is in fact not an area where rights as I understand rights have any application.

Rights are bogus. It is might and strength that are real. We take what we want from nature because we can. As Nietzche truly wrote: Die Mach ist das Recht.

ruveyn

I say we get a small, fast freighter, cut cannon ports in the side, give the Sea Shepard a full broadside, throw grappling hooks for a forced boarding, make the crew walk the plank, and take the ship as prize!

Animals aren't human and therefore do not deserve human rights. What next, will we be crying over the death of each and every cornstalk? People gotta eat. Whales are lesser beings because they're vulnerable to harpoons.

So its okay to be a thug and a pirate then.
You just contradicted yourself.

Agreed. We are so hung up on pretense that we write about it.

I don't eat seared flesh because i think i have the authority to, I eat it because i wanna, and i can.

Exactly human rights, why do humans think their rights are what makes the world go round. I am perfectly fine with harvesting from nature what is needed for survival. BUT the amount of meat produced at this time is not a necessity it is gluttony, in theory we have all the energy needed for feeding each and every human being on this planet instead because so much food is prodcued in the most cost inefficient ''meat'' tons of people still have to struggle to survive.

It is because of our own failure and greed that people still live in poverty. People who live in absolute poverty dont have any commercially produced meat in their diet anyway. So the argument saying that we need meat to survive is bogus.
Dont talk about the western world needing meat to survive, we dont need it. We are conditioned to need it. Why is there still poverty in the world ?, because once you are in their pocket they will never let you out of it. Slavery is still here its just drive by poverty, poverty helps companies cut their production costs.

I would like to see you get harpooned and shrugg it off like humans do.

BTW i admit to being hypocrit i eat cheaply produced meat too, as soon as i have full control over my dinners i will change that though.