Freebase Dali

__________________

VEGANGELICA

I agree it is healthy to try to understand people's views and motives. At the very least, it lets us know each other better.

The reason vegetarianism vs. eating animals is a tricky issue, I feel, is that choosing what or whom one eats *isn't* a personal choice: it directly affects other beings.

The best non-meat analogy I could give would be circumcision. Some people feel that whether or not a parent decides to have the genitals of a child cut "is the parent's personal choice." Yet it is obvious that parental choice over circumcision isn't a *personal* choice, because the child is the one affected and cut against its will.

Similarly, eating meat destroys the whole body of an animal against its will, so deciding to eat an animal isn't solely a personal choice.

__________________

Riloux Gartier

Technically meat eating isn't natural. The only reason humans began to eat meat in the first place is out of desperation. We originated in areas that were optimal for growing vegetables.

But anyway, a lot of vegans aren't technically against the whole concept of meat eating, even though it does more bad than good. It's more about factory farming and the amount of environment pollution it's contributing to. Plus, the treatment of animals in these factories is one of the most sickening things you will ever witness.

As for me, becoming a vegan has been one of the best things I've ever done. I'm healthier than ever and I've learned a lot about sustainable living.

VEGANGELICA

Riloux Gartier! Greetings from a fellow vegan! There aren't many of us on here (or anywhere in the world), so I am interested in learning more about your views and your journey to them.

I feel that eating animals is natural in the sense that we evolved the ability to digest them and many people *do* eat animals (so it definitely happens "in nature" and thus is "natural"). People even eat pennies...so even that could be argued to be "natural," of course. Whether eating animals is ethical behavior toward animals or good for you or the planet are the questions that interest me.

I think you and I, as vegans, are very aware that a well-planned vegan diet is just as good as an animal-base diet, and has definite health advantages over diets containing animal products, since vegan diets usually include more healthful plant compounds and less saturated fat (and of course no cholesterol). It is very difficult, for example, to die from heart disease when one is vegan.

I agree with you that becoming vegetarian and then vegan was for me one of the best choices I made in my life and one of the ones that I am happiest about. And I'm aware of all the sustainability benefits of vegan diets!

Now, this is interesting that you say "a lot of vegans aren't technically against the whole concept of meat eating, even though it does more bad than good." My general impression is that most vegans are against the concept of humans eating meat and any animal product (as well as using materials made from animals).

However, I mentioned earlier in a thread that a vegan I knew gave her dogs fresh steaks from cows people killed after raising the cows on pasture. So, she was trying to give her dogs the best care. I'm not sure how she rationalized over the intentional human slaughter of one sentient being to feed it to another sentient being...especially when dogs *are* omnivores and vegetarian dog food exists!

__________________

Guybrush

When a meat diet has been a tremendously important part of our evolutionary history with consequences for our whole biology which includes stuff like brain size and the shape of our bodies, how can you say it's unnatural? And you say we come from places "optimal for growing vegetables". Meat in our diet happened a long, long time before agriculture. It's a matter of a diet change measurable in millions of years ago (meat eating) compared to something that first happened some thousands of years ago (agriculture).

Vegetarianism was not an option for the average healthy human not long ago. In most places on our planet, such a diet would lack essential nutrients. Being a vegetarian is feasible in modern societies today because you can have vegetables grown on every continent on your plate to fulfill your nutritional needs. Needless to say, it's not long ago that most couldn't. In Norway (where I'm from), that would've been a real problem up until not very long ago at all, probably easily measurable by decades.

I think you should reconsider what you think of as natural or not.

__________________
Something Completely Different

Urban Hat€monger ?

Maybe the dog didn't want to be vegetarian.

I thought this was supposed to be about animal rights not imposing your own opinions on others.

__________________

VEGANGELICA

All that you say is correct, Tore, based on my understanding of human history and modern society. It will be interesting to hear Riloux's response.

You chilly grassland people in Norway wouldn't have fared well without some sort of animals in the diet. And even if early Norwegians had just raised cattle and used cow's milk, I don't think people have bred cows yet who can give milk without being pregnant and giving birth...and so one always ends up with a growing cow population. This, of course, leads people to want to kill and eat some of the cows (or calves).

A big disincentive to following vegetarianism in countries that have grassy hills that aren't suitable for cultivation is financial, since people's options for earning a living would be severely decreased if they couldn't base their livelihood on raising animals and killing them. I assume Norway doesn't have much arable land? I think I recall you said it didn't.

__________________

VEGANGELICA

Well, Urban, I think if you asked a dog if she minded being vegetarian, she might say, "Woof," and then salivate all over the vegetarian kibbles, so you could take that as a no.

The real test would be to offer a juicy bloody steak in one bowl, and some prime veggie kibble in the next bowl, and see what happens. My guess is the dog would eat both (though prefer the steak)!

But you are right...one does have to consider what is best for a pet and what the pet would like. The basic conflict for a vegan is this: if you are someone who values animals' rights (to life, to choice, etc.), then how can you feel right about killing one animal to feed to another? I think many vegans probably try to avoid such killing as much as possible.

So here's a question, since you point out veganism is about animals rights: Would the pet want to be a pet in the first place? When I see dogs with their owners, the dogs look happy. But when I see dogs meet up with another dog on the street...WHOA!!! Those dogs go ape-shit with joy! They are excited! They pull on the chain! They can't wait to sniff each other's butt! They want to play and romp! Even more than they want to do this with humans.

I really think dogs prefer to be with other dogs. So, should we be keeping them in our homes and in kennels when we're gone? Should we limit their access to their own species, just so we have someone to pet? After all...we have each other to pet...isn't that enough?

__________________

noise

i would be very interested in seeing some archaeological evidence to support these unusual claims.

__________________
my flac collection

Guybrush

Does arable mean land suitable for growing vegetables? I've never seen that word before, but from context, it seems a likely assumption.

Not much of Norway is suitable for growing vegetables. I did check up on some numbers, but that was a long time ago. Without modern fertilizers, I guess it must've been even harder. We have a lot of rocky mountainsides and the like where certain sheep and cows do well, but where it's very hard to grow veggies.

__________________
Something Completely Different