PETA sues SeaWorld for slavery of whales

eightdotthree said:
It doesn't negate the fact that capturing large animals from the wild, forcing them to swim in small tanks and perform tricks is cruel.

I wouldn't describe it as cruel, or suggest that they live only to do tricks. I would also bring up that it's my understanding (I could be wrong) that SeaWorld has a policy of breeding, not capture, and that this may in fact be law in many countries.

The point is, the entire issue as framed by PETA completely lacks context. I don't know the history of all of the animals, but as I recall, Tillikum was captured by some Canadian facility and then not treated well, and it was SeaWorld that rescued him from that situation. Many of the captive whales born in the wild had extraneous circumstances. SeaWorld has a very long history of conservation, and it's a part of their culture going back to their Busch days. When you make beer for a living, it helps to have something in your organization that does something a bit more noble.

Most animals in parks (Busch, Dollywood, etc.) are either injured an unable to return to the wild, or born in captivity. Not saying it's ALL of them, but those two classes seem to form the large majority. The parks I mentioned seem to post considerable signage on the subject...

Last time I went to Sea World I saw a group of dolphins in a corner of their tank cranking out key chains to be sold in the gift shop. It made me feel very, very sad.

Good one Carrie.

Ok, so pretend you are a survivor of the plane crash in Alive. You have a choice of eating the pilot (who you don't know), or your dog. What's for dinner?

I can't really imagine either scenario. But, if pressed, I think I could eat Spot before I could eat Pete the pilot. With some bbq sauce maybe I could handle both.

I can't fathom saving even my pet over another human being. Unless that human was a dangerous criminal or something and in some way a threat to me or others. I love animals, but come on.

Who here said they would?

There were a few. Might want to reread the thread.

Lord Gonchar said:

The problem is that so much of what they do is just over-the-top attention grabbing. They're a joke.

they may be a joke and most people faugh at them, but we are still discussing the issue right?

Anyway, check this out: http://www.10news.com/news/29575536/detail.html

Those uncaring bastards.

janfrederick said:
they may be a joke and most people faugh at them, but we are still discussing the issue right?

Yeah. And in three pages of discussion only one person seems to kind of agree with them. More importantly, in all of the wacky PETA discussions we've had around here, I don't think anyone ever had their point of view changed.

So what good is it doing? (besides the obvious PETA self-promotion)

That's the point I keep coming back to.

In the end it's kind of like, "So what?"

Publicity stunts generate just that, publicity. I'm sure the whales are glad PETA is getting so much attention with their stupid fake lawsuit.

It's weird enough that they apply the traits that make us distinctly human to other species, but even more weird that they kind of go through the motions doing things that make some people feel good, but don't seem to result in actual change...to a problem that's arguably not really a problem in the first place.

The whole process is bizarre and makes it easy to suspect either complete stupidity or ulterior motive.

What really gets me is that the lawsuit (and the headline) makes PETA seem completely insincere or utterly insane (or both!). It is completely absurd and will likely get thrown out, and any lawyer (even PETA's), could tell you that in a second.

So why are they doing it?

They're not doing it for the whales - as has been discussed and well-documented countless times before, many (a majority?) of Sea World's animals are bred in captivity, rescued from injury, or otherwise just not capable of living in the wild. Ethical Treatment of these Animals does not involve 'freeing' them from 'slavery'... they're just not equipped for it. They'd swim into the ocean and die within days. Hooray. Freedom. If that's what PETA *actually* wants, they're insane. If it's not, the lawsuit is frivolous and completely insincere.

So why are they doing it?

It's for publicity. Again, not for the whales - we've already established that a true "win" for PETA would kill the whales. It's for completely self-serving, "HEY, REMEMBER US!? WE FIGHT FOR ANIMALS! ...oh and we need your donations" bull****. They are using Sea World's whales as a tool to generate awareness (and thus, hopefully, money) for themselves, with no real intent or expectation that anything that they do will better the lives of the whales. Isn't using animals for profit sort of the antithesis of what PETA is supposed to stand for? The fraud is so transparent that I'd be embarrassed for them if I weren't too busy being disgusted.

Even if you're for the general 'be nice to animals and let them be free' agenda that PETA pretends is their ultimate goal, I don't see any way that this can be interpreted as anything other than a slimy, pathetic money/attention grab.

I think the Humane Society's take on animal welfare, compared to PETA's outlandish gestures, is far more reasonable and pragmatic. By not trying to equate animals as equals with humans, but rather simply as beings of their own sort that deserve to be treated with a minimum of suffering, they gain a lot more sympathy and persuade many more minds.

It seems to me that PETA simply doesn't take itself seriously. Like too many groups (the Judean People's Front and the People's Front of Judea come to mind), they're more interested in screaming stridently than they are in truly being heard.

^I find your reasoning compelling. It seems like The Humane Society is more interested in finding people who are more "reasoned" and generally rely on their intelligence, whereas PETA tries to get people who are more emotional and likely to "follow their hearts". In Colbert terminology, THS looks for people who think logically about the condition of the species we share the planet with, and PETA looks for those who "follow their gut" instinctively.

The use of the word "slavery" bothers me to the degree that it minimizes what actual human beings have gone through...and some still continue to go through. I love animals and all...but people still take priority (although reaching 7 billion of us seems pretty much unsustainable).

Raven-Phile said:
I rescue my/a dog, it licks my face and wags its tail.

Right after licking himself.

eightdotthree said:

OhioStater said:
So if I am reading you correctly, eightdotthree, black Amercians (and other humans who are currently or who have in the past been subject to slavery) are equivalent to whales.

It's African Americans if you really want to get down to it.

I didn't even mention the suit in my post which I find ridiculous. It doesn't negate the fact that capturing large animals from the wild, forcing them to swim in small tanks and perform tricks is cruel.

OhioStater said:
You know, there's an old psych study where they ask you to consider a scenario in which a stranger and your dog have both fallen into icy water (like on a frozen pond)...which one would you save?

I wouldn't on the frozen pond with my dog to begin with.

OhioStater said:
Someone has watched way too much Disney.

Really?

OhioStater said:
You also apparently feel the deaths at the hands of Killer whales are some sort of vigilante justice on part of the beasts.

When you play with fire you get burned.

This is pathetic. I'd be truly surprised if you changed any minds with this post, nitpicking what blacks are called in this country? In Britain they're just black, and that's good enough here in America to not be offensive too.

These animals have in most cases not been captured in the wild but instead have been raised in captivity. Dolphhins love interacting with humans, so if one was raised in captivity and interacted with humans on a daily basis, why is that bad?

I'm sorry, you have not at all supported your argument in this thread (one of your answers was simply "really") and I'm not on your side on this. Convince me that animals are 1) aware of where they are and 2) unhappy where they are and I will start listening to you. Until then, sionara.

Ben

I'm one who said I'd save my dog before another human stranger. My dog is my best friend. He is family. He sleeps with me, goes on trips with me, takes walks with me, I share my food with him, we watch TV together, I love him. We play with his toys together. He always enthusiastically greets me at the front door when I come home. Of course I'd save him before I'd save a stranger. No question in my mind.

When he passes away, I will be devastated. Devastated. Strangers, on the other hand, die all the time, and affect me minimally.

I guess the point I am trying to make is, pets are people too... To me anyways.

I kind of forget what that has to do with PETA's stupid attention whoring. :D

I also agree with Ensign Smith's take on the Humane Society. I think in general a more moderate approach is the most reasonable over extreme one-sidedness [i.e., either PETA's views, or the semi-ignorant quote that 67440Dodge did on me (I get the joke and appreciate the humor, but it's basically the same thing as the environmental guy picking fights in that other thread earlier this week)].

As for who to save, save whom/whatever you can without picking favourites. Though, I do sympathize a bit more with an animal because they may be slightly less able to save themselves.. Not that I would even use that as a rule.

Humane Society, Animal Friends, ASPCA... there are plenty of organizations that spend their money on helping animals rather than causing self-serving spectacles.

^ Have to agree 100% about the Human Society's approach vs. PETA. I have never crossed paths with a rational human being who takes PETA seriously.

^^^

And LK, this is where the discussion can get really fun. :) No one would argue that you love your dog, think of him like family, etc...but think of what just happened in the scenario; someone's brother/father/daughter, etc. just died...because of your choice.

The next interesting question is, how do you feel if you are the dead person's family?

And what does it say about our society that we care more about an animal (an animal that is regular restaurant fare in some countries, by the way) than a fellow human being?

I know...way too deep for Sunday morning.

Time to take my daughter trick or treating anyway. :)

bjames said:
I'm sorry, you have not at all supported your argument in this thread (one of your answers was simply "really") and I'm not on your side on this.

I was accused of Disney movies having an impact on my views on animal cruelty. It's completely ridiculous. Hence the "really?" response.

bjames said:
Convince me that animals are 1) aware of where they are and 2) unhappy where they are and I will start listening to you.

Keep a dog contained in a small cage and tell me that it's not completely aware and unhappy. But even beyond the obvious cases where animals are completely aware of their surroundings I still don't think it's right to treat them poorly if they aren't.

The Human Sociery has the same position as PETA on this issue BTW.

It is not just tragic but almost irrational to suppose that it could ever be in the best interests of such a complex animal to be confined in a small tank and trained to entertain us. Some orcas may adjust better than others; some orcas may be more timid and find the company of humans a substitute for the family life that captivity takes from them. But no orca captured from the early 1960s (when the first orca was brought into captivity) through the late 1980s (when most orca captures ended due to public outcry) was ever best served by being taken from his or her mother (a mother who would otherwise have been a life-long companion) and shipped far away to live in a box.

This should all be self-evident. Maybe at last, in the 21st century, it will become so. Tillikum should be given a chance to live a better life. He should be retired to a sea pen, given more space and choices and stimulation. And as the remaining captive orcas age and die, let orca exhibits become a thing of the past.

I am not defending PETA's actions. I am simply on their side.