Pierced fish?
- Thread starter Johnnybravo60025
- Start date
jcardona1;4066850; said:
You are looking at this from the fish's point of view without acknowledging that the fish has no point of view.
A fish cuts itself on a sharp rock, it heals. It cuts itself on a fishing hook, it heals. You are using the notion that a living creature that lacks reason recuperating from wounds is an excuse for a human with reason to impale that fish with something metallic. The fish is going to heal no matter what. Why do you think that makes it okay to pierce it?
Now, onto us being hypocrites. Fishing is almost as old as the modern human. Piercing a fish is not. Fishing for sport (unnatural) has evolved from fishing as a means to survive (natural). Piercing a fish (unnatural), has evolved from keeping fish in aquariums (also unnatural).
Both can be considered wrong, but one is so much more wrong than the other. I don't understand how you don't see that.
Madding;4066882; said:
if the fish has no point of view, why are we even having this discussion??
Madding;4066882; said:
so now it's the fish's fault that it got caught on the fisherman's hook?
Madding;4066882; said:
you're right, i dont understand how you view one as sooooo much more wrong than the other. its silly. to me there is no difference. just because man used to fish a long time ago to survive? umm okay. fishing is PURELY a sport for enjoyment. nobody needs to fish to survive. piercing a fish is done for enjoyment. i see no difference
I see them as equally wrong. But fishing is more accepted. That is the bottom line. I fish. But I wont pierce my fish.
I agree with both sides but the arguing is becoming annoying. Just realize that both are unnatural and one is accepted one is not. I wouldn't pierce my body either lol. Good day.
I agree with both sides but the arguing is becoming annoying. Just realize that both are unnatural and one is accepted one is not. I wouldn't pierce my body either lol. Good day.
That is actually very false. What about the underdeveloped countries/villages that have no other food source?jcardona1;4066895; said:
BTW guys, I didn't really start this thread to say that it was inhumane or anything, I just wanted to see if anybody else had seen stuff like this.
i meant in the context of sport fishing in developed countries, by the same type of people that would be keeping an aquarium with fish in their house...Johnnybravo60025;4066918;4066918 said:
jcardona1;4066895; said:if the fish has no point of view, why are we even having this discussion??
Because we are people on a forum dedicated to fish.
jcardona1;4066895; said:
This is where you aren't seeing my point. People do not go fishing with the intent of leaving a hook in the fish's mouth. People who pierce their fish have all intentions of forcing that fish to live its life with a piece of metal in its lip.
It's a matter of perspective, I guess. You think reeling a fish in is more cruel or as cruel as decorating your fish with jewelry. I feel the opposite way. The fish doesn't understand either way, so I guess it's just up to each individual to pick their opinion.
I won't say it is cruel, But it is really too much, It is like having a wig on a dog, Extra bad taste
jcardona1;4066895; said:so now it's the fish's fault that it got caught on the fisherman's hook?
Let me rephrase myself since you must have taken my wording way too literally. "A fish is cut on a fishing hook..."
I think you knew what I meant, but there you go.
Hypocrisy is usually a large part of these discussions alas. be odd, leaving it would be normal...
This debate has nothing to do with what is cruel, and everything to do with what is normal. To illustrate, consider this...If I posted a picture of a puppy with pierced ears, I'd be flamed and possibly charged with animal cruelty. It is however, considered fine to cut of half that puppies ears or it's tail for the sake of fashion.
