No. You're wrong. There is only one point of view. We are exterminating these species at an alarming rate. This is fact and not up for debate. We have the data to prove this. We've seen it many times in our history. A hunter might have a alternate point of view than I do in regards to whether or not killing a white rhino for fun is an acceptable practice, but regardless of the point of view, there are only four left.
Not arguing the fact. It's what we do with it. Sorry, but I'm not wrong. People CAN disagree with you, and they do. If you want tolerance when it works for you, you have to give it when it doesn't. Anything else is hypocrisy, and that's what I'm calling out here. Save the four rhinos the legal way, not by ruining this guy's life and bullying others into your world view.
We get our opinions, we don't get to snuff out others who disagree with us.
No. Screw that. I don't care how strong your opinion is on something. Data is data. I'm sure there are people in Japan who share the opinion that whale populations have remained unchanged over the last century. That doesn't mean we should entertain the idea of allowing them to commercially whale at will.
For the umpteenth time, I'm not arguing data. But data is just information to be plugged in to an equation. You are completely talking about something else entirely here, I think.
The Japanese cannot violate the law. If they can whale without doing so, you can certainly make your position known, you can lobby for a change in the laws to prevent them, but you can't threaten to kill whalers, you can't defame them, you can't marginalize them and their families. Your underlying premise that "animals are important, and the higher the number the better" isn't universal. I'm sorry that it isn't, but it isn't. And that's a fact too, that YOU have to live with.