1. I do agree with the Norwegian and Japanese position on permitting the hunting of non-endangered species of whales as a cultural exemption. These two countries claimed that whaling made up an important part of their cultural legacy and I feel that these countries have the right to preserve this cultural legacy as long as certain conditions are met. The conditions that I believe should be met are conditions such as the whales that are being hunted must be a non-endangered species of whale and that these whales must only be hunted in moderate portions. These conditions would basically make it hard for the species of whales in these two countries to become endangered and makes it possible for these two countries to be able to preserve their
…show more content…
These claims should be balanced against world opinion by comparing whaling to some of the things that other countries such as the United States do. The United States should not be so concerned about Norwegian and Japanese people hunting whales and should not call it cruel when they have done much worse things with their animals in their factory farms. The amount of suffering that animals have to go through in American factory farms is much worse than the quick death that the whale has to experience when they are being hunted in Norway and Japan. The United Kingdom allows deer to be shot for commercial reasons and British slaughterhouses are allowed to exist but whaling is considered bad. A process where foxes are mauled by dogs called fox hunting is legal in places such as the United States and Ireland but whaling is considered bad. Comparisons like these should cause people around the world to wonder why whaling is considered bad by countries that allow their citizens to do much worse things to their animals. Not to mention that banning whaling in Norway and Japan would be much like banning agriculture in the United States. The banning of agriculture would hurt farmers in America just like the banning of whaling would hurt fishermen in Norway and Japan. Banning agriculture would hurt the culture and economy of America just like banning whaling would in Norway and Japan. So the best way to balance these claims against world opinion is to compare whaling to other
These claims should be balanced against world opinion by comparing whaling to some of the things that other countries such as the United States do. The United States should not be so concerned about Norwegian and Japanese people hunting whales and should not call it cruel when they have done much worse things with their animals in their factory farms. The amount of suffering that animals have to go through in American factory farms is much worse than the quick death that the whale has to experience when they are being hunted in Norway and Japan. The United Kingdom allows deer to be shot for commercial reasons and British slaughterhouses are allowed to exist but whaling is considered bad. A process where foxes are mauled by dogs called fox hunting is legal in places such as the United States and Ireland but whaling is considered bad. Comparisons like these should cause people around the world to wonder why whaling is considered bad by countries that allow their citizens to do much worse things to their animals. Not to mention that banning whaling in Norway and Japan would be much like banning agriculture in the United States. The banning of agriculture would hurt farmers in America just like the banning of whaling would hurt fishermen in Norway and Japan. Banning agriculture would hurt the culture and economy of America just like banning whaling would in Norway and Japan. So the best way to balance these claims against world opinion is to compare whaling to other