Opinions on ban of shark fin - Page 37

On October 27 2011 12:53 Elite__ wrote:
I can't even fathom how one of the arguments to keep shark fin soup legal is that its a cultural tradition. From the video's I saw, the sharks are being brutalized and are then just thrown back into the ocean to rot at the bottom where they cant move because they don't have their fins, and since they are in the water its not like they are suffocating, they just lay their until they have this terrible, long death.
.

On October 27 2011 12:58 Elite__ wrote:

I don't care what it tastes like. If I was someone who ate shark fin soup once in a while and knew that If I stopped eating it, I would help save a species, then that would be much more rewarding than the damn taste.

On October 27 2011 12:58 Elite__ wrote:

I don't care what it tastes like. If I was someone who ate shark fin soup once in a while and knew that If I stopped eating it, I would help save a species, then that would be much more rewarding than the damn taste.

On October 27 2011 12:53 Elite__ wrote:
I can't even fathom how one of the arguments to keep shark fin soup legal is that its a cultural tradition. From the video's I saw, the sharks are being brutalized and are then just thrown back into the ocean to rot at the bottom where they cant move because they don't have their fins, and since they are in the water its not like they are suffocating, they just lay their until they have this terrible, long death.

Are people really not willing to give up a tradition for what is potentially the survivability of an entire race of animals? I completely understand that people hold shark fin soup near and dear to their hearts since it is a tradition, but how can a tradition be more important than the sharks live's?

And what is even more mind boggling to me is that people are talking about how the soup tastes so good and nothing can replicate it. Why should the taste of it matter? You won't give something up for the greater good because it tastes good? I absolutely love peanuts but when I was young I developed an allergy to them and was not able to have them. I wouldn't risk my health simply because I still like peanuts. The same thing goes with shark fin soup being banned. It being banned is like having an allergy to it, you simply cannot have it or there will be severe consequences. If I knew I was saving a whole race of animals by simply not eating something that tasted good, then so be it. Its a small price to pay, even if I don't see the rewards first hand.

On October 27 2011 13:00 LanTAs wrote:


Cows, Pigs, Chickens, and other forms of major livestock owned by major companies are pretty much tortured throughout their whole lives. How can it still be legal when they are brutalized for many years and then finally killed and shipped to the nearest local market?

YOU KNOW WHAT?
WHY DON'T WE ALL BECOME ALL BLOODY VEGETARIANS?

"No, because nothing can replace the taste and texture of meat. Once you try bacon, you never go back."

See what's going on here?

On October 27 2011 13:01 IMSmooth wrote:


He doesnt even read what you say. He is blindly and intentionally just sticking to his point without counter-argument for the sake of getting more posts and baiting people into making bannable posts back at him in frustration.

On October 27 2011 13:01 IMSmooth wrote:


He doesnt even read what you say. He is blindly and intentionally just sticking to his point without counter-argument for the sake of getting more posts and baiting people into making bannable posts back at him in frustration.

On October 27 2011 13:07 taldarimAltar wrote:
To some the difference may be obvious but the fact of the matter is it is fucking hard to argue that saving a culture is more important that saving a species, and VICE VERSA. Loss of culture and loss of a species are lamentable, but ultimately they are based on sentiment, everyone's just sad that the species/culture is gone.

For a government the choice has to be a utilitarian one, the consequences of banning shark fishing or not. Banning may result in loss of the livlihood of fishers and restaurants, as well as anger from those who feel the chinese are marginalising a minority, may affect relations w china and other asian countries. Not banning it would make a majority of people angry, goverment may feel it has to appease the majority lest be voted out. From a ultilitarian standpoint, I think the goverment should not ban fishing.

On October 27 2011 13:05 Blasterion wrote:

Dear sir, no need to be angry, if it was about that earlier post, I definitely apologize for letting the heat get to my head. But you really shouldn't deny something without having a taste of it first.

On October 27 2011 12:58 saltywet wrote:


what makes you think banning shark fin eating in toronto will stop shark pouching?

the way i see it, china, hong kong, singapore will NEVER ban shark fin soup. if the rest of the world bans it, then that just means there will be much more supply for shark fin soup for chinese people living in these chinese countries; the price of the soup wont go down as it will be balanced by the decreasing population of sharks and just by the vast amount of overseas people who will travel to these legal areas JUST to be able to eat shark fin soup.

imo, countries banning shark fin soup is just decreasing their GDP and making chinese countries richer

On October 27 2011 13:10 IMSmooth wrote:


The problem isnt taste at all. I understand that kimchee to me tastes like poop but it is an integral part of korean culture and tastes amazing to them. However, they aren't endangering an entire species by driving the demand for it. No you cannot argue "just one more" shark wouldnt hurt. It WILL hurt because everyone else has that mindset.

I could care less about the humane/inhumane way they harvest. It is the fact that if sharks were to become extinct or critically endangered it would have DRASTIC effect on the most important ecosystem on the planet. They are that important.

On October 27 2011 13:11 Tektos wrote:


Just because another country is being environmentally irresponsible does not mean we have the right to be irresponsible too simply because "they're doing it so it doesn't matter if we do it too".

Every jurisdiction where the sale of shark fins or the prevention of shark finning occurs is a small victory in the grand scheme of things.

On October 27 2011 13:00 LanTAs wrote:


Cows, Pigs, Chickens, and other forms of major livestock owned by major companies are pretty much tortured throughout their whole lives. How can it still be legal when they are brutalized for many years and then finally killed and shipped to the nearest local market?

YOU KNOW WHAT?
WHY DON'T WE ALL BECOME ALL BLOODY VEGETARIANS?

"No, because nothing can replace the taste and texture of meat. Once you try bacon, you never go back."

See what's going on here?

On October 27 2011 12:54 Reborn8u wrote:


There is a species going extinct every 20 minutes Because of humans
No, we are not forcing them to become criminals, we are forcing them to not cause extinction. There are plenty of other aquatic animals they can hunt for profit, that don't face extinction. A lot of seafood is being farmed these days. Maybe they should try it.

(Most of us) We have these things called brains, when we use them and really think about our role on this planet, and what an oasis of life this Earth is. Among the vast emptiness of space that surrounds this planet completely devoid of anything that can sustain life. We realize that It IS our responsibility to save species instead of destroying them

"We don't need sharks in the seas for any reason. They eat fish, and we're already over-fishing the Oceans, so overpopulation of fish won't be a problem, most people don't eat actual sharks, they don't compose a large portion of people's diet, so if someone want's to have shark fins there's literally no negative consequence to it other than people in the future not being able to get shark fins..."

This is just such an ignorant statement I'm not even sure how to respond. Are you trolling? Apex predators like sharks are CRUCIAL to a healthy eco system. They weed out the weak and sick, and make sure that the stronger and healthier prey survive into adulthood.

Everything on this planet has a role and co-exists (except humans) their existence has a purpose grander than such small minded thinking can comprehend. The fact that you honestly believe that everything on this planet is just here so we can harvest it until it's gone, leaves me almost speechless. This kind of thinking is EXACTLY what will lead humans to their own self destruction. I feel ashamed that we are even the same species. You need to do some reading kid, because arrogance and ignorance go hand and hand. You clearly are a pile of both, there are mountains of research about the role apex predators fill and their importance. Maybe you should try to learn what you are talking about before you spew the first idiotic thing that comes to mind.

A decade or so ago, scientists re-introduced wolves to Yellow Stone National Park. Humans had eradicated them from the mid-western U.S. It was controversial at the time, a lot of foolish people made terrible arguments about the lack of necessity. Now that they are once again thriving, it is clear to everyone how important they are. All of the herds of grazing animals have become overall healthier, and are maintaining sustainable populations. They have brought balance. The reproduction of the wolves' prey is being kept in check, the grazing herds can't just stand around all day doing nothing and making babies. They are being chased by wolf packs and forced to stay on the move. The weak don't survive to create weak offspring. Also, many scavenger animals are thriving again because of the carcasses being left. Ecosystems are incredibly complex, it's not about "what can they do for us" They do things for us that are so indirect we don't even realize it.

Do you realize that the reason this earth has an atmosphere and breathable oxygen is because microscopic organisms in the ocean were performing photosynthesis for billions of years, of which oxygen is a byproduct. All the oxygen then floated to the surface and accumulated creating the biosphere your breathing right now? If you didn't realize this would you also say about them "it's just plankton who cares if it goes extinct?"

Would you just pull a part out of your car engine, when you didn't understand it's role? Then jump on the highway and try to drive to Miami. No, because the car might run for a little while, but that part might have been part of your cooling system. So now 20 miles down the road your engine is catching fire.

Bottom line, our generation was born unto a dying world. Yea, that's right, if things keep going the way they are then it isn't a question of "if we will all die" it's a question of "how long till it happens". Humanities destruction of earths environment has started a timer, that ends with our own extinction. Problem is we don't understand how to read the clock, we don't know how much time we have to try and fix what we've done.

Yeah, sharks might be just a tiny piece of the overall issue. But it's the thinking (or complete lack of) behind this behavior that I find so disturbing.

On October 27 2011 13:13 Blasterion wrote:
Banning is always a bad idea, the smart thing would be to tax what you don't like so you can make money out of it