Can vegans...

Recommended Videos

Eclectic Dreck

New member
Sep 3, 2008
6,660
0
0
Nothing stops a vegan from doing any of these things. Being a vegan only implies that they do not eat animal products. I'd be willing to bet a great many vegans would also refuse to use animal products like leather and such as many of them chose to be vegans for "moral" reasons rather than health reasons.
 

Fanta Grape

New member
Aug 17, 2010
738
0
0
BonsaiK said:
ultrachicken said:
BonsaiK said:
Don't ask me how it happened, but I meant to quote this guy, and ended up quoting you. Whoops.

Krion_Vark said:
ultrachicken said:
Krion_Vark said:
IshFish said:
Can Vegans (i guess im talking about ethical vegans mainly)...
wear leather?
wear wool?
use fossil fuels (coal, petroleum, and natural gas)? cos fossil fuels are basicly made up of dead organisms (including animals).

Hope you can quench my curiosity

~Ish
I know of a Vegan who would eat fish and animal IF AND ONLY IF caught or killed it herself. It was the only way the she deemed it ethically sound.
... I don't get it.
Most vegans not the PETA vegans. Say that they will not eat anything because they do not agree with how it is acquired. This person would hunt and fish themselves so that they could say that they agree with how they got the food.
That's not what I meant. I'm confused as to why killing an animal yourself is somehow more morally correct than having someone else do it for you.
Oh right. I think the issue there is twofold:

1. If you're doing itself you know you're not carrying any impurities into the food (or maybe you are, but hey then you only have yourself to blame, right?)
2. If you're doing it yourself then you can make sure you're not makling the animal suffer any more than is absolutely necessary to get the job done.

Having said that, a vegan would not kill and eat animals, period.
I would.


I'm a vegan by moral choice and to simplify why, it's because I'm lazy.

Modern day processes of animal and animal products are a mix of humane and sadistic. For example, many cows are kept in cages for their entire lives or chickens made to walk in their own filth in a barn with a hundred others, having severe medical problems.
But I have no problem with animals dying. Animals die all the time. It's natural. If I truly did what I believed in, I'd find a place that treated animals with respect and then try to promote them. But I'm lazy, so it's easier to go vegan.

Regarding the question itself, I use as little wool as possible, I have a leather belt and shoes but try to minimise them, and yes, I use fossil fuels because the animals didn't suffer needlessly. But having said that, the modern world is pretty horrendous at being vegan friendly. Mock-leather is extremely pathetic junk, wool is everywhere, and there's animal products in nearly everything. Gelatine is a huge problem...

and I know there's many people out there who may think, "What's the point? It doesn't change anything and you're obviously still helping the industry by using products. <refer to "products made from cattle" image>"
Just because it won't change anything, I'm not going to support something I don't believe in. I have no problem with people eating meat at all. I'd prefer it if they wouldn't, but they just don't share the same belief as I do. It's a personal choice. But I do as much as I can.
 

zen5887

New member
Jan 31, 2008
2,923
0
0
Fanta Grape said:
Modern day processes of animal and animal products are a mix of humane and sadistic. For example, many cows are kept in cages for their entire lives or chickens made to walk in their own filth in a barn with a hundred others, having severe medical problems.
But I have no problem with animals dying. Animals die all the time. It's natural. If I truly did what I believed in, I'd find a place that treated animals with respect and then try to promote them. But I'm lazy, so it's easier to go vegan.

and I know there's many people out there who may think, "What's the point? It doesn't change anything and you're obviously still helping the industry by using products. <refer to "products made from cattle" image>"
Just because it won't change anything, I'm not going to support something I don't believe in. I have no problem with people eating meat at all. I'd prefer it if they wouldn't, but they just don't share the same belief as I do. It's a personal choice. But I do as much as I can.
1. Totally.

The reason I'm not a vegetarian is because the meat production in Australia isn't that bad. I've been around farms pretty much all my life, and I've never seen anything other than open pastures and the like (for cows and sheep at least, I can't comment on poultry, but make sure to buy free ranged when I can). I'm certainly not against eating animals at all, what with the food chain and all.. But I'm totally against animal cruelty. If I was living in North America things may be different.

2. I really dig this paragraph, and I wish I could show it to a lot of people. Props.
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,633
0
0
Fanta Grape said:
BonsaiK said:
a vegan would not kill and eat animals, period.
I would.
Then you're not a vegan, regardless of any other factors. You may still like to call yourself one, but you would be incorrect in terms of any standard definition of the term. You could of course try and get that definition changed if you wanted to, so it encompassed people such as yourself, good luck with that.
 

Fanta Grape

New member
Aug 17, 2010
738
0
0
BonsaiK said:
Fanta Grape said:
BonsaiK said:
a vegan would not kill and eat animals, period.
I would.
Then you're not a vegan, regardless of any other factors. You may still like to call yourself one, but you would be incorrect in terms of any standard definition of the term. You could of course try and get that definition changed if you wanted to, so it encompassed people such as yourself, good luck with that.
I would, but I don't.
 

BringBackBuck

New member
Apr 1, 2009
491
0
0
I had a vegan friend who would not do paintball because the paint pellets contain gellatin in the casing.

Also if she was being bitten by a mosquito, she would gently remove it and shoo it on it's way.

She was freakin' nuts.
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,633
0
0
Fanta Grape said:
BonsaiK said:
Fanta Grape said:
BonsaiK said:
a vegan would not kill and eat animals, period.
I would.
Then you're not a vegan, regardless of any other factors. You may still like to call yourself one, but you would be incorrect in terms of any standard definition of the term. You could of course try and get that definition changed if you wanted to, so it encompassed people such as yourself, good luck with that.
I would, but I don't.
If you would, but you don't, then you wouldn't (notice how "wouldn't" is like a contraction of the words "would" and "don't" - not a coincidence!), which means you are a vegan.
 

irani_che

New member
Jan 28, 2010
630
0
0
in reality
vegans do whatever they want to.
they are like a relgious group but without a book of fables to unify their sense of morality
 

Swny Nerdgasm

New member
Jul 31, 2010
670
0
0
I remember back in high school my health teacher gave us an assignment where we had to be vegans for a week, that lasted until lunch and i went to get a burger.
 

Fanta Grape

New member
Aug 17, 2010
738
0
0
BonsaiK said:
Fanta Grape said:
BonsaiK said:
Fanta Grape said:
BonsaiK said:
a vegan would not kill and eat animals, period.
I would.
Then you're not a vegan, regardless of any other factors. You may still like to call yourself one, but you would be incorrect in terms of any standard definition of the term. You could of course try and get that definition changed if you wanted to, so it encompassed people such as yourself, good luck with that.
I would, but I don't.
If you would, but you don't, then you wouldn't (notice how "wouldn't" is like a contraction of the words "would" and "don't" - not a coincidence!), which means you are a vegan.
This is turning into a bad Abott and Costello routine real fast...
 

Mr.Numbers

New member
Jan 15, 2011
383
0
0
Echem...

EATING HARVESTED CROPS KILLS MORE ANIMALS THAN IT SAVES.

Eating Soy based products and cereal crops kills a LOT of small field animals in the process, whilst the slaughter of paddy raised beef capitalizing on otherwise unfertile land (IE Not grain fed, soy fed) requires one death and feeds lots of people, harvesting kills lots of small things to feed one person.

This includes mice, rats, snakes and slow birds.

Also: Chickens are a vegetable. Nothing that stupid and aggressive can be classified as sentient creature.
 

Nunny

New member
Aug 22, 2009
334
0
0
fletch_talon said:
Pararaptor said:
BonsaiK said:
2. Yes, because the animal doesn't have to be killed first.
The wool you wear was cut from a sheep with a wicked sharp set of shears. That sheep was wrestled to the ground & held down as it was shaven all over with those big shears, thrashing about, getting nicked all over.

Just thought you might want to know.
I've seen a sheep being shaved, they don't always struggle as much as you would think, and a professional sheep shearer will rarely nick the sheep (you don't want to make a mess or distress the animal more than necessary).

Not saying your wrong, but you are exaggerating a bit.
If you want to call the wool industry cruel you need only point to the practice of mulesing.

Its where they clip the skin around the sheeps rear until it dies and drops off. Its done for good reason though, as seen here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulesing
Still far less cruel then what its preventing.

Flystrike is some nasty shit
 

Maclennan

New member
Jul 11, 2010
104
0
0
Paints and lubricants for mass consumption are not made from cow products anymore, rendering the components is too expensive when byproducts of reactions using petroleum often gives the same or a chemically comparable product. Oil based lubricants are superior in mechanical applications because even with treatment oils from animal products is prone to burning if it is worked too hard.
Ironically you can still get adhesives, paints and lubricants made from animal products, but they tend to be sold in stores specializing in green products where a stereotypical vegan is most likely to shop. It is unlikely you would find lubricants and paint containing animal products at home hardware though they would probably have animal based glue if you looked for it.
 

Dwarfman

New member
Oct 11, 2009
918
0
0
IshFish said:
OK so the line seems to be drawn for most ppl at the concept that they can use animal products when they were not killed for any purpose. Should benefiting from the death on any animal be an issue this?

But if vegans cant eat eggs (im pretty sure thats right) then why can they use wool?
Correct assumption. The only vegetarians that eat eggs are Ovo and Ovo-Lacto vegetarians. To vegans eating an egg is like eating an unborn child. The majority of Vegans do not wear wool. This is mainly over animal rights issues. If the sheep are treated well and not harmed in any way then some vegans may choose to wear wool. For the most part they stick to synthetic or plant based products like cotton and hemp.

Incidently Silk is an animal product from certain breeds of worms so I imagine no silk ties for vegans either.
 

Dwarfman

New member
Oct 11, 2009
918
0
0
BonsaiK said:
IshFish said:
BonsaiK said:
IshFish said:
would it still be wrong for a vegan to eat a giant plate of Salad with little bacon bits in it?
Yes. A vegan wouldn't eat that.
So then should they not use fossil fuels cos a small part (even a very very small part) of it is made up of animals?
... Whereas the bacon that goes on your salad (I'm not a vegan, but bacon bits in salad? Yuck!) was most likely killed by humans (or human-driven machines) for the specific purpose of the meat industry.
Bacon Yuck?!?!?!

Come on... You meaning to tell me you've never eaten a caesar salad?
 

Dwarfman

New member
Oct 11, 2009
918
0
0
ravensheart18 said:
I read the title of this thread and wondered what a "can vegan" was. They only ate vegan cans?
Canned vegan...the other processed meat! Good sir we shall make $millions$
 

Nunny

New member
Aug 22, 2009
334
0
0
zen5887 said:
Nunny said:
Still far less cruel then what its preventing.

Flystrike is some nasty shit
But there are far more humane ways of preventing it.
Most other current methods are far less efficient, costly and just not viable in certain area's.

Some of the most healthy animals we have had have been bought from farms that practice mulesing.
 

courgettecake

New member
Feb 19, 2011
1
0
0
Hi there,

I'm vegan and I've just signed up to clarify this matter.

Vegans do not use the products of animals in any way, shape or form. So we don't eat meat, poultry, fish, as these have to be killed directly to be eaten.

We also don't eat dairy and eggs, as although the animals aren't killed directly, there is still just as much suffering in these industries as the meat industry. Male hatchlings are sorted by conveyor belt in their 1000s, and either end up in the compacting machine to be ground up alive or asphixiated. So for every female laying hen one male chick suffered this fate. Also, when females' egg laying capacity declines, they are sent off to slaughter for cheap meat products.

Likewise with the dairy industry, for every female milking cow, a male calf was born whose usual fate is to be separated from its mum at a day old and sent to be raised for veal. This causes extreme anguish and distress for both. So there is no effective difference morally between milk and veal. Females are also forcibly impregnated by the farmer's hand and kept in a constant cycle of pregancy, birth and lactation before being sent off to the knackers long before her natural life expectancy.

Eggs and milk and other by products are still part of the slaughter equation, and as vegans we try to remove our selves from it as much as possible and practical. Modern life does make it difficult to avoid entirely, eg matches and car tyres, but just because we can't be perfect, it's no excuse for not doing anything.

As for leather, vegans do not use leather; it doesn't matter that the cows were raised directly for their hides, or if it's a by product from the meat industry, we still reject any use of animals for human ends.

For wool, the same applies, it's still wrong to expropriate any animal parts or bodily secretions, no matter if you don't have to kill the animal to get them, it's a violation of their integrity to keep them in captivity and take a life for mere human whim.

Some vegans will still continue to wear leather and wool if they bought it before going vegan, and gradually replace these items as circumstances and finances allow.

As for fossil fuels, there is no direct animal rights issue here as the animals in question have long since been dead. However, many vegans are very ecologically minded as we see the connection between fossil fuel emissions and habitat destruction for wild animals... So we try to live as lightly as possible, and being vegan is also enormously beneficial in this regard too. Also, using public transport, minimising flights, cutting down on packaging, not buying so much consumerist 'stuff' etc etc.

Addressing the issue of collateral damage of small animals in harvesting machines in soya/ wheat etc production, most of these arable crops are grown for animal feeds. As the conversion efficiency of plant protein to animal protein is only something like 1:4 to 1:10, it causes much less suffering an death to these small creatures by eating the plants directly, than eating them 'secondhand' in the form of animal flesh

So to sum up...

If the animal has to be killed directly to get the product = neither vegetarian nor vegan
If the animal doesn't have to be killed first = vegetarian, but not vegan
Only if a product is completely animal product free it is considered vegan.

Hope that helps to clarify any misconceptions about veganism.