Otherwise it's out of sight out of mind. I'd bet that the majority of people on this forum wouldn't be able to say (without using google) which cities have banned the sale of shark fin and which airlines have banned shark fin from their cargo.
Are you saying that to be against something you have to be able to name every single aspect of the situation if you want to be credible? If that is your premise, can you name all the relevant laws regarding child abuse, how they differ from state to state and what cooperation Australia has with neighbouring countries in order to stamp out sex tourism? If I'm following your premise correctly - that if you can't discuss an issue in detail then your opinion is not serious - then you should be able to discuss these issues regarding child abuse or we can assume that you're not seriously in opposition to the behaviour.
I'd bet that you are 100% against child abuse but you cannot accurately discuss Australia's international cooperation on the matter. I don't think your probable lack of knowledge on the issue means that you are not seriously against it, just as I don't think that my lack of knowledge on airline policy means that I am not against the practice of shark finning.
I'm sorry but I just don't get how people can have an opinion on a couple of sharks being killed here when they only have an opinion on millions of sharks being killed when asked about it. It's like jumping up and down that someone pissed in the Murray and only caring that nuclear waste is being dumped in the Amazon when asked about it.
So your premise is that your opinion is only valid if you are pro-active in starting conversations on the matter? If that is the case, how often do you start conversations regarding the horror of child abuse? If we follow your probable premise on shark finning then if you don't regularly tell other people your opinions against child abuse we must assume that when asked about it, whatever your response is, it is not to be taken seriously.
Again, I'd reckon you are genuinely against the act of child abuse, just as most people are genuinely against the act of shark finning. And I DO NOT see a comparison between the two acts at all. I am not comparing them, I'm simply using your own premise on another issue, that 'if you don't initiate arguments against something then you are not genuine or credible'.
And none of us here are jumping up and down about shit, mate. don't over-dramatise what's taking place in order to belittle it. We are having a conversation about something that is prominent in the media and saying how it makes us feel. This should not be over-exagerated in order to then compare it with other issues in a way that reduces the legitimacy of people's responses as that is an unrealistic depiction of what is occurring.