Since 1993 the United states has attempted to impose sanctions upon other countries in hopes to bring about change in favour of western values and opinions. n the other hand Norway and Japan seek to be exempt from the international whaling ban based off of cultural grounds. In 2000 during a UN conference these 2 countries argued that the whales that they were hunting were not endangered and did not pose any environmental danger. Also that whaling was inherently apart of their culture. For many generations whale hunting has been a main food source for many cultures. The Norwegians argued that the international effort to prohibit whale hunting was seen as imposing other countries cultural values on them. In certain parts of the world there are entire villages that rely on Whaling and Whaling sanctions have threatened the lively hood of those villages. …show more content…
To answer this question I look to my own values and thoughts about life and human existence. It's my view that we as human beings are consciously and technologically capable of completely eliminating the slaughter and consumption of all forms of wildlife. Over the last 100 years we have seen how technological advancements have changed the fabric of cultural norms across the globe. I believe as we advance we should use our technology to create natural food alternatives that doesn't involve the killing off the worlds resources. I believe that we have a moral obligation to respect the world as a whole and all existing forms of life should have individual freedom to life what ever that may Intel. There for I do not agree with the Norwegian/Japan position on the hunting and killing off of the worlds