Veganism...why?

[JoJo]

Veganism is the logic extension of vegetarianism, since as mentioned above in today's methods of production, many animals die because they're the wrong gender or type for milk or egg-making industry. That said, it's very difficult to have a healthy vegan diet and one must deliberately make up certain lost nutrients from the lack of certain foods... I'll think I stick to my steak and cheese thank you ;-)

 

[Da Orky Man]

I only know one vegan and I would ask her, but frankly, she's scary. She's never mentioned why she's a vegan, and I'm not going to ask any time soon. Wouldn't describe her as smug though.

 

[Lionsfan]

Why is veganism a thing?

Because it gives us Telepathic Powers

So....Watch your tone buddy

 

[ClockworkPenguin]

I'm a fully fledged carnivore. However, if you are a vegetarian primarily because of reasons relating to animal suffering (as opposed to environmental concerns) I can't see why you wouldn't go the whole hog and be a vegan.

Generally, animals kept for meat are treated a damn site better than animals kept for work/dairy. Admittedly, they have shorter lives, but still.

 

[Eamar]

I have one vegan friend, and I remain decidedly unconvinced. I myself was vegetarian for several years as a teenager (full-on carnivore these days though) and flirted with the idea of veganism for a bit. Then I realised how impractical it is.

The thing that gets me is that you can never live a fully vegan lifestyle. You have to avoid all animal products, everything that contains an animal-derived ingredient, anything that was tested on animals... for every single product you use in your life, not just food. It's just not possible to do it 100%. Of course, not being able to do something perfectly isn't necessarily a reason not to do it at all, but I have a hard time working out where people draw the line and how they justify it.

Plus, while it's possible for vegans to have a healthy, balanced diet, it's damn hard. Most vegans I've known weren't getting everything they needed. (As an aside, the aforementioned current vegan friend was seriously overweight until recently. I'm still trying to work out what she was eating...)

So, my feelings are that I can sympathise with wanting to treat animals well but veganism just isn't practical.

I'd be interested to try it as a temporary experiment though.

 

[WaysideMaze]

I know a vegan. He decided to take it up about 6 months ago just to give it a try, since he was never a big meat eater anyway.

He said he feels much healthier on this diet. No moral issues, just likes the health benefits.

As for me? Cheeseburgers all the way G.

 

[BaronUberstein]

Well I can certainly understand the idea of making the animals not suffer, I hear fear-meat is all stringy.

But then again, Vegans would call me a monster because my attitude is simple: We made these animals, they would not exist without us because we took the original animals and bred them/modified them to our purposes. The modern cow, pig, and chicken simply wouldn't exist without us, and we made them for specific purposes, such as meat, milk, and eggs. Thus, not using them for the reason we made them for is wasteful.

Of course, I argue that I don't want feces in my meat, so of course hygiene must be considered. That's about my only issue with factory farming.

 

[peruvianskys]

I'm an abolitionist, in that I think even non-human animals should be considered moral "persons" due to their ability to suffer and thus should not be slaughtered, held in ownership, or used as food producers.

I consider cows and pigs and chickens to be morally equivalent to retarded human beings, in that using them for our own benefit when they can't consent is immoral and a violation of their rights.

Animals clearly have desires. They clearly feel pain. I don't see any scientific reason why a human being with severe mental retardation should be considered any more important than a pig. Both deserve the right to exist free from violence or coercion. That includes not slaughtering them as well as not buying and selling them. If you wouldn't hook up a toddler to a milking machine, then I don't think you should hook a cow up to one.

What's so weird about that?

But then again, Vegans would call me a monster because my attitude is simple: We made these animals, they would not exist without us because we took the original animals and bred them/modified them to our purposes. The modern cow, pig, and chicken simply wouldn't exist without us, and we made them for specific purposes, such as meat, milk, and eggs. Thus, not using them for the reason we made them for is wasteful.

So if the slave trade had continued long enough that Africans developed particular genetic traits making them more useful as field workers, it would be okay to continue their bondage forever?

If not, please give me a scientific difference between the two situations.

 

[Eamar]

So if the slave trade had continued long enough that Africans developed particular genetic traits making them more useful as field workers, it would be okay to continue their bondage forever?

If not, please give me a scientific difference between the two situations.

The difference is of course that human slaves are not animals. I appreciate that you do not accept this explanation, but the overwhelming majority of people do. I'm afraid you can't expect others to see humans and animals as equivalent for the purposes of questions like this. It's just not going to happen.

I'm curious though (genuinely curious, not trying to be a dick): how would you deal with all the captive animals that already exist? They exist purely because humans have bred them and couldn't be supported in the wild. Would you wait for them to die out naturally? But given your stance on treating them the same as humans, surely you'd be against restricting their right to reproduce? What would you do about the inevitable offspring once you've liberated the animals from captivity? Do you agree with PETA killing the animals that "shouldn't exist"?

Again, not trying to be a dick. I honestly consider this a very interesting philosophical question.

 

[peruvianskys]

The difference is of course that human slaves are not animals. I appreciate that you do not accept this explanation, but the overwhelming majority of people do. I'm afraid you can't expect others to see humans and animals as equivalent for the purposes of questions like this. It's just not going to happen.

Humans are animals. There is no magical difference between me and a cow. We both want things and we both suffer. That's all that I think should be required to make a creature worth moral consideration.

I'm curious though (genuinely curious, not trying to be a dick): how would you deal with all the captive animals that already exist? They exist purely because humans have bred them and couldn't be supported in the wild. Would you wait for them to die out naturally? But given your stance on treating them the same as humans, surely you'd be against restricting their right to reproduce? What would you do about the inevitable offspring once you've liberated the animals from captivity? Do you agree with PETA killing the animals that "shouldn't exist"?

I'd probably support some kind of paid emancipation, where animals were purchased over time from their owners and returned to the wild, or in the case of domesticated animals, into "holding farms" for them to live their natural lives.

Not that it matters. What is right is right and what is wrong is wrong; it doesn't matter if it's easy or hard to reflect that moral reality in our actions.

Again, not trying to be a dick. I honestly consider this a very interesting philosophical question.[/quote]

 

[bojackx]

I don't think "unnescary" is the word, but maybe unnecessary.

I agree, it does seem a little excessive, and I honestly don't see any reason why vegans would avoid free range eggs. If anything, the chickens live happier lives laying eggs than I dunno, living in the wild.

 

[aba1]

I honestly would like to be Vegan if I could but it is very hard to do with getting the proper nutrition. I don't like it but as a human we are made to eat meat and that is just the sad truth. Plus I can't stand the taste of most vegetation which is weird I know but I really cannot stand almost any vegetables but I do eat fruit. I hate being a picky eater :\

I have heard some say it is simply nature to eat animals and that it is all part of the food chain but really humans have sort of grown beyond the food chain. We don't hunt or live in the wild anymore and we farm animals.

 

[Eamar]

Humans are animals. There is no magical difference between me and a cow. We both want things and we both suffer. That's all that I think should be required to make a creature worth moral consideration.

And I respect that that is what you think. But most people will never see it that way.

I'd probably support some kind of paid emancipation, where animals were purchased over time from their owners and returned to the wild, or in the case of domesticated animals, into "holding farms" for them to live their natural lives.

Not that it matters. What is right is right and what is wrong is wrong; it doesn't matter if it's easy or hard to reflect that moral reality in our actions.

That doesn't answer the reproduction question though. Would you restrict the reproductive rights of the animals in these holding farms, or would you run the farms indefinitely (thereby continuing the "enslavement")?

 

[SpAc3man]

Because some people think we should let all the domesticated farm animals be free because hundreds (possibly thousands) of years of selective breeding by humans makes them completely able to function in the wild with no negative effects whatsoever. Also apparently only OTHER animals can eat other animals. Humans cant because we have evolved more so don't need to keep living in a way that allowed us to get this far in the first place.

 

[peruvianskys]

Did you just equate eating meat to the slave trade? Man, sorry to point this out, but if you are this mental about meat you are the kind of people who give vegetarians a bad name.

If by "equating" you mean that I claimed they were both equally lacking in moral justification, then yes.



Just... Chill out a bit.

I know you find it distasteful but your reaction reminds me of that simpsons episode. You can have your beliefs about food but you should not try and impose your beliefs on others. I dont push religion on people, my sister doesn't push her vegetarianism on me or her bloke. Sure, she wont cook food in a pan that has had meat in it unless it has been washed but that is sorta the extent of it.

Am I pushing my veganism on anyone? Of course not. You're free to do whatever you want!

Eating meat is totally natural. Enslaving others? Not so much (Although it has been done for centuries, do not try and equate the two).

Both are very much natural human functions. We've done both for thousands of years.

I get you find it immoral but seriously, do not equate cows being forced to give us milk to the slave trade or the exploitation of people who have severe retardation.

I believe in animal rights. I dont think needless animal cruelty is a good thing. And if research shows an animal has higher functions (Sense of self, in particular) I care a hell of a lot about their welfare.

Then why do you continue to support a system that kills animals for food? If you can afford a computer and an internet connection, you don't need to eat animal products. It's nice to say, "I'm against animal cruelty," but if you still pay money to make more of it happen, then I don't really care.

 

[Secret world leader (shhh)]

snipitty snip

My line of thinking goes like this: if it weren't for insect-eating animals, the insect population would boom out of control and ruin everything for everyone else. If it weren't for animals that eat insect-eating animals, there would be too many insect-eating aninals and thusly too little insects. We have a role in the food chain that must be played just like every other meat-eater. Despite our intelligence, we're part of nature just as much as any other animal.

 

[peruvianskys]

They're simply fools. In a harsher world they would die and the rest of us omnivores, which we are, would continue to live just fine. Without our padded little life you can't just eat half of a human diet and expect to survive. Also, I'm a beef producer, so if you have any questions about our practices, feel free to ask

Isn't it wonderful that we live in a world where we don't have to rely on cruelty and slaughter to survive? That "padded little life" is the same life that lets us heat our homes without children in coal mines and harvest vegetables without slaves in our fields.

Not all progress is bad, Mr. Cromagnon.

 

[LittleShe-Bear]

A number of reasons:

1. Health reasons. Some people believe that an animal product/by-product free diet is better for you.

2. Moral reasons. These come in two flavours; negative vegans/vegetarians and positive vegans/vegetarians.
Positive veggies are vegetarian for boycott reasons, they believe that the production methods of these animal products are cruel but could be improved to the point where their production wouldn't be immoral in and of itself. So, they boycott the product until such time as the industry improves its standards.
Negative vegetarians/vegans believe that the exploitation of animals for food and clothing is and would be wrong under any circumstances so they don't partake in it.
3. Spiritual/religious reasons, I suppose? I'm not religious or superstitious in any way, shape or form so I won't comment further on this.

For my own part, I was vegetarian for years and took the vegan plunge a couple of years ago. My reasoning was that if you're vegetarian for moral reasons, it's logically and morally dishonest not to be vegan because you can't have a dairy industry without a meat industry, it doesn't make economic sense, they work hand in glove with each-other. If you consume dairy, you're still supporting the meat industry.

As for the "What would happen to the animals/these animals wouldn't exist" arguments I'd say this. For the animals that are already bred, I don't think any of us, barring the most zealous, unrealistic and naive vegans (read: crazy), believe that the world would turn vegetarian overnight. If it were to happen, it would happen gradually, and the production of these animals would decrease in line with that. As for the animals that would never exist in future, I don't place value on potential life, it doesn't exist so it can't be subject to any significant interests.

Speaking of significant interests, that's my main moral reason for not partaking of animal products as best I can. I don't see any moral difference between humans and non-human animals. We're subject to the principle of significant interest; we can feel pain, fear etc so we should be treated accordingly (for instance, if, as some have suggested, molluscs like oysters and mussels have no more capacity for pain than a cabbage, then morally I'd have no problem eating them).

As for the argument that the production of plants involves the killing of animals too (I don't have any figures on this so I don't know how true or untrue this claim is), I'd probably invoke the doctrine of double effect (google it, there'll be loads of articles on it that could probably explain better than I could). I don't think any system is perfect but you should do the best you can.

Finally, on a personal note, pleeeeease don't lump me in with hippies and PETA. I don't support PETA, I loathe them for their policies and for making my side look bad. Secondly, I don't wear dangly earrings, I'm not obsessed with hemp, I don't believe that crystals have Powers (they're pretty, mind) or believe any other supernatural stuff like that. I hate PETA. I don't hate hippies, I just think they're silly.

 

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

Because eating animals "is immoral and unnatural." That's what the only vegan I've known says. Oh and "humans are actually herbivores that force themselves to eat meat from a young age."

 

[Secret world leader (shhh)]

Because eating animals "is immoral and unnatural." That's what the only vegan I've known says. Oh and "humans are actually herbivores that force themselves to eat meat from a young age."

Correct me if i'm wrong, but i'm pretty sure if we were herbivores, we'd be physically incapable of eating meat.