In my last post concerning Paul Watson's Editorial in The Vancouver Sun, I suggested that it be ascertained whether Mr. Watson actually said the things about captivity of whales being preferable to them dying in the oceans. It appears that, not only was he not misquoted, he wrote the piece himself. The best that I can say about his editorial is that it is completely illogical, unreasonable and, therefore, lacks compassion entirely. Anything that is not logical and based on reason can have nothing of compassion in it.

I think that humans have the idea that compassion is only feeling sorry for a suffering being and, perhaps trying to relieve that suffering. Compassion is the realization that it, itself, is the way things are. It is based on the noninterference with the process of existence as it is. Compassion views change as the only enduring principle and it never interferes with that change. However, we humans think we know what's best for existence on this planet. That is obviously the biggest mistake consequent today. Humans interfere with everything. Some of us seek, contemporarily, to interfere in the life process itself. Compassion allows every individual, and I do mean every individual, member of every species to live its life free to live its life. Compassion is not wishy-washy sentimentality. It is hard, warm reason and logic. It is the need to understand and to leave alone. It relieves pain and suffering where and when it can and it realizes that most, if not all, of the pain and suffering are caused by the human animal's interference in the lives of others.

Paul Watson should have one of his supporters point out the illogic and unreasonability of his aforementioned editorial. It is wishy-washy and, therefore, lacks compassion.