This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
First I have to say that my husband and I were in our courtyard last night, with wine, vegan pizza with shiitakes, portobellos and chanterelles (still working through that five-pound bag of Daiya cheese), and Diana Krall playing. But today's post is about World Vegan Day, so onward. Some go vegetarian first, then vegan.
Image via Wikipedia I found The Goode Family disappointing on the vegan side. One complaint many of us have with "liberals" and "progressives" is that they tend to leave veganism and animal rights out of their sphere of concern. Are Baby Boomers killing Facebook and Twitter? Yeah, lots of mockery, but I didn't laugh.
Hal Herzog’s “ Some We Love, Some We Hate, Some We Eat ” (Harper 2011), though fascinating, is ultimately depressing for vegans and animal rights activists. Over at Animal Rights and AntiOppression , we’ve been discussing tactics and sharing our thoughts and experiences about what works and doesn’t work when it comes to advocacy.
But alas, we' re too important and special to "manage," and every human pregnancy is treated as a sacred, blessed event, while we kill the kittens inside pregnant feral cats every day without batting an eyelash, and in fact we're relieved when we can catch one who's pregnant, as that's x number of cats who don't have to come into this world.
Reading thousand-word long posts in black type on a plain white screen with nothing interesting to look at isn't exactly a satisfying sensory experience. I understand the impulse to do " something " that alters the number of animals created to be used and killed and the suffering of the ones created. So I failed.
As you know, Cheri and Jim are in the early stages of setting up their sanctuary, after a long journey of conscience that began with them closing their dairy goat operation, then transitioning to a vegan way of life, and eventually, creating a loving, lifelong home for farmed animals in need.
Fortunately for them (though less so for the cuckoo), in one experiment they ejected 100% of all cuckoo model eggs. The phrase they suggest using is “Feed two birds with one hand”, or the vegan version “Cut two carrots with one knife”
The book, which I have not read, that saved Derrick Jensen 's life is called The Vegetarian Myth: Food, Justice, and Sustainability by Lierre Keith, who was a vegan for 20 years, suffered serious medical problems, and started feeling better when she recommenced eating animals. Throughout the book, Keith mocks vegetarians and vegans.
When in the position of having the choice, which so far is always, I'd rather choose not to have someone killed for me. The two objections to a vegan Thanksgiving that I hear most often are: It's our tradition and Because it tastes good. This is a tough one to even dignify as it's not a good reason for killing someone.
Is it true that the least I can do is support the engineering of animals who experience less unpleasantness than they would have had they not been engineered that way? Why kill and maim and waste taxpayer dollars--or any dollars--on such things? That action is to opt out and go vegan. This is where I'm confused.
I say "if you know someone" because this isn't a book I'd recommend to vegans for their vegan education efforts. The vegans I know would probably find it a bit maddening, and here's why: We aren't sure whether Foer is a vegan. But this plate also holds all of the animals that were killed for your serving of sushi.
Not the day, the film, where Bill Murray experiences the same day over and over again. When I think about the language that has been used by people who kill animals or have someone else do it for them, a couple of years ago the "compassionate" trend began. Lipka introduced me to the idea of killing "respectfully." Respectfully?
The next argument is usually something along the lines of: But animals in the wild might starve to death, and get injured, maimed or killed by predators! Finally, people who object to our moral stance jump species and say we should object to the lion killing the gazelle. Yes, that's true. Besides, we have choices.
There are moral reasons to go vegetarian: recognition that it is wrong to contribute to unnecessary animal suffering the injustice of exploiting animals and killing them for no good reason If human have rights, then many nonhuman animals also have rights, and confining and killing these animals for food violates these rights.
Ethical vegetarianism is the thesis that killing and eating animals is morally wrong whenever equally nutritious plant-based alternatives are available. Similarly, most people also agree that: (2) It is wrong to kill a conscious sentient animal for no good reason. Nor ought we kill them without reason.
Vegan vegetarians who eat only vegetables, fruit, and nuts do not completely remove all microorganisms from their food, even with repeated cleaning. Second, it might be argued that although it is wrong to kill microorganisms, it is not obvious that eating them kills them. Killing a hog can be avoided.
He clearly thinks that it is wrong to cause animals to suffer unnecessarily, but he appears to be somewhat ambivalent about killing animals (provided the killing is carried out humanely). However, the above rationalization does not directly address the issue of contributing to the unnecessary killing of a conscious sentient being.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 30+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content