tirsdag 30. oktober 2012

Was it necessary to use so much money and time to save 3 whales? (Film topic, Big miracle)

Was it necassary? From my point of view, I think it wasn't necessary to use so much time and money to save 3 whales. When they again only saved 2, and the main character (the girl from Greenpeace) was only exaggerating. How much money could they use at other things? Like help people in other countries, or generally something better than try to save 3 whales...

The iniuts meant that the smartest thing was to kill the whales and eat them. That is simply the best idea in my eyes. That's the way of life, people day, animals die, the life goes on. We can't just use thousands of dollars at each animal, that is just to dumb...

But this was my meaning, and only my meaning, so I hope no one feels offended. :)

2 kommentarer:

  1. It is true that it would have been easier to just kill the whales and allow the Inuits to eat them. It could have saved a lot of money and energy. However, its part of American culture to stand up for the rights of those who can't stand up for themselves. That even means the rights of the whales in the ocean. The "American Dream" is the opportunity and freedom to create a life for yourself, free from oppression. It's only natural that Americans would want to secure that right for the beautiful animals in nature, as crazy as that sounds. This is just my observation as a student currently living in America. Anyways, we love whales. 'MERICA

    - S.

  2. we are all entitled to our own opinions regarding the saving of different species. It is true that Americans love to stand up for those who can't stand up for themselves. And when the press start writing about the whales, everyone is hoping they will survive. But as Rohit says, so many people need help as well.