The Instigator
paulbrevik
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
EthicsPhilosopher
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Norwegian Whaling

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/13/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 380 times Debate No: 61630
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

paulbrevik

Pro

I will be arguing in favor of Norway's minke whale hunt. Opponent can start with arguments. Only accept this if you are capable of completing the debate. Thank you!
EthicsPhilosopher

Con

Norwegian Minke Whaling: For human consumption

Many would agree that the lives of many people are more important than one of a single whale. There are, though, many other components that add to the weighing of the morality. There components are the following:

the way it is killed- (how long deaths take, amount of pain before death, etc.)

use- (in this case, human consumption, but not all that necessary considering the fact that people will not die if the whale isn't killed.)


amount of whales killed- (per day, week, month, year, etc.)

type of whale- (is it on the endangered species list? In this case, no. The minke whale is the most numerous species of whale, but, this type of over-hunting could threaten the wellness of the population. Also, it could throw off the stability of the environment if too many were killed. This could effect many other species of animals, and, in return, us- the human race.)

how much we need to hunt them- (not much, people won't die because of a lack of whale meat in Norway)


With a large amount of consideration and research, I have decided that - without any trace of doubt in my mind- that it is an immoral, cruel, and unnecessary business. (despite the jobs it could make for the economy)


I will state the reasons why throughout the next few responces, all of the terms are accepted.

Debate Round No. 1
paulbrevik

Pro

My opponent presents several valid points, which I will try my best to refute.

Animal Welfare: While whaling is commonly viewed as cruel, the statistics back up the whalers. In fact, 80% of whales are confirmed dead instantly upon being shot with the harpoon. The exploding head has been crucial in reaching this figure, by instantly detonating in the whale's heart/neck region, rendering it instantly unconscious.

My opponent stated that whaling is not necessary because whale meat is not the only food source in Norway. But this is true of many food products. It is necessary to prove that whaling is unreasonably more unethical than say, fishing. There is always an alternative meal, but does that mean McDonalds should go out of business because no one would die without it?

This season, hunters have got 729 whales, out of a total N. Atlantic stock of 120,000. The whales are listed as "least concern" and the hunt is widely recognized as sustainable. Of course anything technically harms an ecosystem, the effect is negligible in comparison to issues such as pollution.

There may not be many whalers in Norway, but they need the money from it just like you. Farmers profit from slaughtering cows, fishermen may choose to hunt whales for their income. They are both animals and the people are both human beings. It is arbitrary to believe a whale should not die while accepting the death of other animals.
EthicsPhilosopher

Con

EthicsPhilosopher forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
paulbrevik

Pro

paulbrevik forfeited this round.
EthicsPhilosopher

Con

Due to school, I seriously lack time. I apologize for the inconvinience, please vote for pro.

Thank you for your time. Again, I apologize sincerly.
Debate Round No. 3
paulbrevik

Pro

paulbrevik forfeited this round.
EthicsPhilosopher

Con

EthicsPhilosopher forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
paulbrevik

Pro

paulbrevik forfeited this round.
EthicsPhilosopher

Con

EthicsPhilosopher forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by EthicsPhilosopher 2 years ago
EthicsPhilosopher
I beleive that I can finish all other rounds, and if the last debate takes place during the weekend, I may be able to go to the library to finish it.
Posted by EthicsPhilosopher 2 years ago
EthicsPhilosopher
I beleive this will be the debate I miss, due to the weekend. I will get back on Monday, and poste 2 debates. There will only be one rebutle, correct? Or a rebuttles' rebuttle. O-
Posted by paulbrevik 2 years ago
paulbrevik
Yes that will not be a problem.
Posted by EthicsPhilosopher 2 years ago
EthicsPhilosopher
I would like to debate you, but I will not be able to post anything during the weekend so I may miss one ( I have no connection at the house I go over to during the weekend)

Is that okay?
Posted by paulbrevik 2 years ago
paulbrevik
Thanks! I believe they are used for food in Asia as well, but thanks for exhibiting some logic (unlike the more crazy environmentalists :)
Posted by Mister_Man 2 years ago
Mister_Man
The main reason (in Norway) whales are hunted are for human consumption and use. I find this justified. If you had said whaling in Asia, I would have accepted. Good luck!
No votes have been placed for this debate.