But vegans are against eating canned pre-cooked food as well. Doesn't matter that the "meat" is 1% actual dead animal and 99% cardboard or if the noodles are 99% the stuff that got stuck to the wheat mill during flour production and 1% egg. Those folks will not eat it.
Vegans aren’t against precooked, that is the macrobiotic types tjat only eat raw food and use a low speed blender to not add heat and destroy nutrients
And like, even if it was dinosaurs, Dirt is also (partially) made from decayed animals. And, oversimplifying, that dirt becomes plants.
And that’s all fine for vegans, because it doesn’t involve exploitation of animals. Like, if you needed to raise and kill animals to use their corpses to grow plants, that’d be animal exploitation.
you are most definitely exploiting animals in the scenario you described. do you think i need to build a water table in order to exploit it for a well?
You think any animal would choose this “safety” for beeing killed after a max of 1/10 of their lifespan? I wont even start about the living conditions most animals are in. For sea animals also nothing of your arguments holds true and we kill a fuckton of those.
You know its one thing to contribute to suffering because change is hard. Pretending this is something symbiotic is ridicoulus though.
So i guess you tried really hard to google? A good example might be cows. Beef cattle is slaughtered on average between 1.5 to 2 years after birth and would be able to live for over 20 years. Pigs also live 15 to 20 years but are slaughtered after 6 months. So great thanks for that symbiotic relationship they can witness up to two whole seasons (provided they are one of the “lucky” ones that are raised outside). It is kinda telling how much the average consumer knows about the “products” they consume.
You think any animal would choose this “safety” for beeing killed after a max of 1/10 of their lifespan?
i have yet to find proof that nonhuman animals understand personal mortality, so they wouldn’t even be able to understand the choice you are presenting.
There is tons of evidence if you would not refuse to look. Especially social animals (for example pigs and cows) would outcast individuals out of their herd. They are also quite intelligent. But hey it is comfortable to pretend we got some high ground while we all know that animals have feelings and that what we do is cruel beyond imagination. And all that to just satisfy some urge for a special taste and convenience. I wish people would at least not pretend its ok.
Nah, i know some irl who admit its shit but are to weak to change anything about their behaviour. I agree though that those pll probably will come around eventually.
Well maybe it is because a symbiotic relationship would need tonsomewhat benefit both parties. In this relationship we are more of a cruel and sadistic parasite, just waiting for the best moment to kill (when profit and taste is at its best). But no, i guess being forcefully impregnated, seperated from offspring and milked until your are unprofitable is a symbiotic relationship in your mind. As a thanks for service these cows get killed after half of their live span. But hey atleast they get much more than our beloved meat live stock. You should also look how naturally these cows and their udders have ‘’''evolved"" in the last hundred years. Much more cruel than what has been done to pugs (not that this is fine). The same goes for hens (for eggs) and the absurd amount of breast muscle chickenbreeds have.
i aggre with you if you’re talkin about mass capitalism version of veganism, but the original activist movement of veganism, which is more direct and utopic, is in fact against vehicles itself, cos the production of everything involved causes harm to animals environment.
definitionally you aren’t vegan if environmental impact is your terminal goal. It would be like saying you’re Christian for the cathedrals or something.
Veganism is a philosophy and life practice of trying to minimise harm to other earthlings. It can involve environmentalism as an instrumental goal, that is protecting the environment to avoid mass suffering, but a world of perfect environmental preservation where all ants have depression would be unacceptable to a vegan but not to an environmentalist.
Many people with environmental goals adopt a plant based diet and/or lifestyle.
The definition privileges action, which is why vegan philosophy is generally fine with stuff like foxes hunting birds but not humans hunting foxes to save birds.
Taking action to depress ants to save others would go against the ethos as defined:
“Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.”
Definitely should forsake technology and get back where we belong. Lions and dolphins have to rough it out, why are we acting like we have the right to just not die of sepsis?
A prey animal will try to fight off its predators, is this wrong of the prey animal? Should the prey animal lie down and accept its fate, because it doesn’t have the right to not get eaten? Why do you think nature has a “correct” state and that deviating from this is bad?
i aggre with you if you’re talkin about mass capitalism version of veganism, but the original activist movement of veganism, which is more direct and utopic, is in fact against vehicles itself, cos the production of everything involved causes harm to animals environment.
Add comment