this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2025
110 points (99.1% liked)

Canada

10781 readers
384 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago (7 children)

Love how your source doesn't actually say the orca released only lived a little while before dying

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna3700297

[–] Bebopalouie@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 months ago (6 children)

It shows hope for the future. It would be bleaker if we did not keep trying. The alternative is life in a cement jail.

[–] DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Does it?

It shows dying early deaths. Is that better than a life in a (better) captive place?

[–] Bebopalouie@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Definitely, trial and error for a solution is better than giving up. The long term as a solution would provide forever after that point.

Some deaths would provide for no deaths in the future.

Just my plebe thoughts is all.

[–] DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And as fair as that view is, I wouldn't do "trial and error involving the likelihood of death" on humans, or for me, most (if not all) living creatures.

So that's gonna be a controversial sell, and using "save the dolphins" that leave out crucial info isnt going to be it..

[–] Bebopalouie@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I agree it’s untenable.

There would be many peops that agree to take that risk on.

Even though, it would be a no go right from the start due to funding and as you mentioned harm to others.

The thought I had is far beyond my pay grade so to speak but would not a few deaths on either side be worth it to save many many more in the future?

[–] DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

No, it's not ethical.

It's unacceptable to do that to humans in a 'modern Western's' clinical ethics setting.

I agrue it's still unethical to do to animals..

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)