Start new topic
Poll: Banning Whaling
 
Support the Resolution?
Yes [ 7 ]  [63.64%]
No [ 3 ]  [27.27%]
Abstain [ 1 ]  [9.09%]
Total Votes: 11
Guests cannot vote 
Posted on Aug 19 2004, 09:35 PM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
Banning whaling
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.


Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: All Businesses
Proposed by: Konigreich_der_Nacht

Description: Recognising that:

* Overfishing is a serious problem which is depleting the marine environment by upsetting its natural ecosystem.

* Whales are a highly-developed mammal with advanced social and communications systems.

* Whales already face many threats including entanglement in fishing nets, noise disturbance and pollution.

* Whaling has already driven the world's whale population to the brink of extinction before the present moratorium was put in place.

* The current motorised harpoon method of killing whales is barbarous, causing a slow and agonising death to the creature involved.

* There is little that can now be learned from 'scientific whaling'. Scientific enquiry can take place without the need for slaughtering its subjects.

* A voluntary moratorium on whaling is not working. Pro-whaling nations will simply subvert it for their own ends by vote-buying or by abusing so-called 'scientific whaling'.

Proposing that:

* Unlicenced scientific and all commercial whaling are outlawed in international law. Nations that flout this ban are subject to economic sanctions and whalers' boats can be impounded and destroyed.

* A commission is set up by the United Nations to study the effects of overfishing and on other human activities on the marine ecosystem, and to propose solutions. If it sees a genuine need for scientific whaling, then it is empowered to licence limited scientific whaling.

* Indigenous peoples who engage in 'aboriginal whaling' using traditional non-industrial methods and taking only a small number of whales each year, to be exempt from the ban. A register of such peoples to be set up by the UN.

Votes For: 3973

Votes Against: 1147

Voting Ends: Mon Aug 23 2004

Lamoni's position: Undecided
Lamoni
Democratic Maniac
********
Posts: 1952
Quote Post
 
AOLYahooMSNTop

,
Posted on Aug 19 2004, 09:40 PM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
Lamoni supports this UN Resolution, but has minor reservations about the following part of the legislation:

* A commission is set up by the United Nations to study the effects of overfishing and on other human activities on the marine ecosystem, and to propose solutions. If it sees a genuine need for scientific whaling, then it is empowered to licence limited scientific whaling.

Is it really a good thing to create even MORE buracracy?
Lamoni
Democratic Maniac
********
Posts: 1952
Quote Post
 
AOLYahooMSNTop

,
Posted on Aug 20 2004, 09:26 AM
PMEmail Poster
 
Nuke the damn whales. Who cares if we lose another species? We should just buy a big salfemale sexual organer lake, and breed the whales. Then we could kill them at our desire. This is a better resolution than banning whaling, and I expect you - as the UN delegate - to consider the beatiful articulation of my new resolution and to take it into serious consideration. Why else would swiss cheese have holes? You all can ban whaling in your waters, but my whales will remain test-subjects for cosmetic applications such as hair jelly. Thank you very much.
Xile
Punch-Drunk Psychosis
****
Posts: 358
Quote Post
 
AOLTop

,
Posted on Aug 20 2004, 11:31 PM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
Looks like the votes are going against you, Xile. tongue.gif
Lamoni
Democratic Maniac
********
Posts: 1952
Quote Post
 
AOLYahooMSNTop

,
Posted on Aug 23 2004, 10:06 AM
PMEmail Poster
 
I remain dedicated to my purpose!

(By the way ... what's with the auto-edit of that one word? I can't even remember, but I am sure its not a female organ...
Xile
Punch-Drunk Psychosis
****
Posts: 358
Quote Post
 
AOLTop

,
Posted on Aug 23 2004, 05:11 PM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
It would depend on what the word was.
Lamoni
Democratic Maniac
********
Posts: 1952
Quote Post
 
AOLYahooMSNTop

,
Posted on Aug 23 2004, 06:00 PM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
What was the word?
Vilita
Founder
*******
Posts: 1300
Quote Post
 
ICQAOLYahooMSNTop

,
Posted on Aug 23 2004, 10:18 PM
PMEmail Poster
 
QUOTE (Vilita @ Aug 23 2004, 07:00 PM)
What was the word?

It was in the middle of the opposite of freshwater, involving the first 3 letters of "water" and the last 1 of "salt".
Aquiliana
Dedicated Scribe
**
Posts: 68
Quote Post
 
AOLMSNTop

,
Posted on Aug 24 2004, 04:33 AM
PMEmail Poster
 
Nuke the damn whales. Who cares if we lose another species? We should just buy a big salfemale sexual organer lake, and breed the whales.
Chacor
Senator in Training
****
Posts: 233
Quote Post
 
Top

,
Posted on Aug 24 2004, 09:35 AM
PMEmail Poster
 
Salt-water lake i suppose. Anyhow, I'd feel bad about voting against this, but I agree with Xile. -explicitive removed- the whales. The UN isn't gonna stop me from making bubble gum out if them if I want to.
Abattoir
Pinprick of Apathy
****
Posts: 398
Quote Post
 
AOLMSNTop

,
Posted on Aug 24 2004, 06:19 PM
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
 
The Free Republic voted yes on the UN Resolution yesterday, as the regional vote indicated.
Lamoni
Democratic Maniac
********
Posts: 1952
Quote Post
 
AOLYahooMSNTop

,
Posted on Aug 26 2004, 08:17 PM
PMEmail Poster
 
And the little man bites the dust.
Abattoir
Pinprick of Apathy
****
Posts: 398
Quote Post
 
AOLMSNTop

,

Topic OptionsReply to this topicMake a quick replyStart new topic

 



[ Script Execution time: 0.0175 ]   [ 15 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]

-->