[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Elephants, white tigers and snow leopards are all on the world endangered species list. They are protected by international law, which would supersede my right to import them whether my country allowed me to or not.

Are the particular species of shark that are being targeted for their fins equally protected? I'm not being flippant, I honestly don't know. If they are, then why do we need our government to tell us it's not allowed if it's already not allowed? If they aren't, then why should our government prevent us from eating them?

All I'm saying, is that I believe in small government. If there's already an applicable law prohibiting something, then why would we need another one? On the flip side, if there isn't a law prohibiting something, do we really (actually) need a new one? Is there a particular, valid reason why we need one? I mean, sure, the procedure for acquiring the fins is cruel and inhumane, but one can equally argue the same for almost any animal-product we consume.

What about declawing cats? Outlawed in many countries around the world, but perfectly legal here in Canada. Is that right or wrong? I think it's terribly cruel to amputate part of a cat's toes just for the sake of protecting our furniture, but I also believe that it should be my decision to make.

The government has enough things to worry about. I don't need it trying to figure out if my cat has all of his toes or if there's a shark fin in my soup.

How do you think Elephants, tigers and leopards got on those lists? Governments agreed to motions to put them there. They are targeting sharks in general for their fins. Shark populations are under huge strain across the globe and finning certainly doesn't help. Declawing cats and finning LIVE sharks, tossing their still live bodies back into the ocean to let them die slowly and painfully is an absolutely ridiculous comparison.