Kw-logo-smaller

Comments

Stop the Seal Hunt

Animal rights groups are expected to protest at the start of this year's seal cull in Canada. Back to Article

Please login or register to add comments

PrideInWastedYouth_2297646
PrideInWastedYouth_2297646 wrote:
2013-04-14 19:59:43 -0700

The same reason America says its okay to kill chickens. We eat foods, meats. How does killing a seal make it any different. I'm sure the mother seal kills too so she can feed her little ones. It's life. I'm not saying its right but it's just the way it is. That's life.

report
Gawgusss Ashley
Gawgusss Ashley wrote:
2013-04-14 19:56:11 -0700

This is just cruel & unjustified.. They are a living animal and deserve to be protected just like any other animal does... Smh...

report
gogogo123_1395816
gogogo123_1395816 wrote:
2010-05-01 13:53:41 -0700

Every animal is important.Why the *beep*does Canada say its OK to kill seals for fun?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!!?!?HHELP THE SEALS!!!!

report
back to story
F1159548229546

Is Hunting OK? Vote!

  • No. Hunting is totally wrong.
  • Yeah. Hunting is a cool sport.
  • It's okay to hunt for food but not for sport.
  • I'm not sure.

related stories

Random in the forums

Teh_Skittlez
Teh_Skittlez posted in Debating:
"Taidoku" wrote:it's wrong because society made it wrong how authoritarian  
reply 11 minutes
Boysrock50
Boysrock50 posted in General:
the junior mods and other debaters/regular forum posters
reply 11 minutes
Teh_Skittlez
Teh_Skittlez posted in Debating:
"kingofdisaster_" wrote:I think they do. I feel like if I say they don't, they'll attack me. Well. They haven't attacked me yet.  
reply 12 minutes
Teh_Skittlez
Teh_Skittlez posted in Debating:
"AlphaT" wrote: "Teh_Skittlez" wrote: "AlphaT" wrote: "Teh_Skittlez" wrote: Ghosts require more explanation than they provide answers Elaborate? Are you saying that they require more effort than they can give back, or that they hold more mystery than knowledge? There's some phenomena that goes unexplained. But that's the important part, we don't have an explanation. By using ghosts as a solution, we are making unexplained assumptions, you're just displacing your lack of explanation onto the ghost, rather than the event itself. And that's the other part, I haven't heard any physics based woo-free explanation for a disembodied intelligence that lacks a physical body but manages to interact with the physical world. So, for me it's basic Occam's razor. The more complicated answer could be true, but until we have evidence to support the assumptions made it's best to go with the simpler hypotheses that operate within the framework we already have.      First off, I do not believe in ghosts. But, why does this entity have to be intelligent? Why can't be some type of unknown energetic remnant of a past life that's being harbored in a given location? Also, how is nothing simpler than a hypothesis? Admitting to not having an explanation is not a bad thing, especially when you don't have one. There's nothing wrong with saying you haven't been convinced of any particular hypothesis so far, and therefore it remains unexplained to you. You aren't saying it was nothing, you're saying you don't know what it was.  How would we measure this remnant energy of a past life? How many joules should we expect to see? The reason we presume cognizance is because people asserting hypotheses about ghosts often assume that these spirits interact with the world and possess some understanding of cause and effect. 
reply 13 minutes
ChickenGoPowPow
Both. :3
reply 15 minutes