Activists from Orissa, India are protesting for the freedom of a man who had incorporated a bear in to living with him and his family. The man, Ram Singh Munda considered the little bear to be good company for his six year old daughter because she had tragically suffered the loss of her mother in an accident. The activists claim that there is no way Ram can fully comprehend the legislation previously passed that prohibits the adoption and domestication of wild animals because he has never been exposed to modern life outside of the jungle. The bear was taken to a nearby zoo, but refused to eat whilst there.
From my personal point of view, I feel that the government is wrong for having the attitude they have. Ram lives in the jungle and therefore does not understand these laws or in many aspects the way of modern life. It is of course true that it is not wise to contain a wild bear inside a human household. However, it can be argued that the bear had adapted itself to living in human conditions and sees Ram somewhat as a father in its life. This is perhaps proven by the fact that the bear refuses to eat when it is in the zoo, empaphazing the fact that the bear will not eat because of the absence of Ram.
My personal viewpoint stands with the activists, and I believe that Ram should be free to live with the bear in its current habitat.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment