I mean I agree it's a radical break with what is considered the norm. But it's a fast growing ethical sentiment that we are not treating our fellow earthlings with the respect they deserve. So if anything a vegan acts from more compassion, more inclusivity. And the fact that this sounds to you as if vegans are out of touch, just speaks to how much you are out of touch with this growing sentiment. It's not as if vegans are acting from some kind of misguided ethical principles. The fact that we lay bare that the unjust treatment of animals is a choice, turns this around. It puts the onus meat eaters to justify their actions. But then they come on forums like this and complain about how we are out of touch and lost perspective and critical thought. It's just not true.
Youre breathing sand, ostrich.
You're literally saying nothing.
Because nothing youve said is coherent. You imply that this is a black and white "eating meat requires abuse and causes all problems vs. veganism solves all abuse and causes no problems" and have made it clear you arent interested in ahaking yourself of that mentality.
Youre ears and eyes are full of sand. Talking to you is as productive as climbing everest naked.
Eating meat requires a victim. You literally have to kill another being for it. You can't deny this, because it's a fact. And vegans do not want to participate in that. This isn't complicated. You choose to participate in the victimization of animals when you are eating an animal that is grown and/or killed for your products. Doesn't matter the circumstances, doesn't matter how, why, when. The animal that is killed is a victim, doesn't get much clearer than that.
You're making it out to be black and white because a child can do this logic. But it's not black and white, there are plenty of edge cases to discuss, and that's literally what the vegan community is doing all the time with many proponents of many different opinions.
But we're vegan because we accept this simple logic and wish to minimise it as much as possible. And food is the easiest, since our body doesn't need it. Plenty of vegan solutions available for the many cases where animals are victims. No need for leather, no need for wool, no need for honey, etc. Minimising animal victims is the goal here. It can never be zero, it can never be black and white.
Sand pouring from your teeth, proving my point with every grain.
Opinion. Not a point
Failure to understand simple points made by others, further proving my point
Funniest part is when you call me the ostrich.
You are calling wool shorn sheep victims, with a straight face. You listed honey bees as an example of victims.
You called me pointing out that you arent capable of discussing this topic rationally an opinion, and then proved my point.
You make diglett jealous with how deep into the mantle youve gone.
Did you know that before we bred sheep for wool they didn't need to be shorn? Now if they escape they are likely to die because their wool gets too heavy for them to do anything. They also get castrated and have their tails docked and have mulesing done, almost always without anaesthetic. And Once the wool isn't any good they get shipped off to be slaughtered for meat. Usually in bad conditions that cause many to die en route. Imagine any of those things being done to you and say you wouldn't be a victim of something. I honestly don't know how some people can be so confidently incorrect about something.
You like to consume animal products and you're indifferent to their suffering for whatever reason, it's ok, just stop pretending like anything else is the case.
I did not realize I was talking with a child, but that explains a lot
Actually I'm being a bit silly here because that's just how I am, I don't know who's sending you death threats either but that's a bit over the top. I am actually curious what your counter points are, though. You haven't really responded to anything that's been said other than to call people ostriches. What is your point of view?
I mean I agree it's a radical break with what is considered the norm. But it's a fast growing ethical sentiment that we are not treating our fellow earthlings with the respect they deserve. So if anything a vegan acts from more compassion, more inclusivity. And the fact that this sounds to you as if vegans are out of touch, just speaks to how much you are out of touch with this growing sentiment. It's not as if vegans are acting from some kind of misguided ethical principles. The fact that we lay bare that the unjust treatment of animals is a choice, turns this around. It puts the onus meat eaters to justify their actions. But then they come on forums like this and complain about how we are out of touch and lost perspective and critical thought. It's just not true.
Youre breathing sand, ostrich.
You're literally saying nothing.
Because nothing youve said is coherent. You imply that this is a black and white "eating meat requires abuse and causes all problems vs. veganism solves all abuse and causes no problems" and have made it clear you arent interested in ahaking yourself of that mentality.
Youre ears and eyes are full of sand. Talking to you is as productive as climbing everest naked.
Eating meat requires a victim. You literally have to kill another being for it. You can't deny this, because it's a fact. And vegans do not want to participate in that. This isn't complicated. You choose to participate in the victimization of animals when you are eating an animal that is grown and/or killed for your products. Doesn't matter the circumstances, doesn't matter how, why, when. The animal that is killed is a victim, doesn't get much clearer than that.
You're making it out to be black and white because a child can do this logic. But it's not black and white, there are plenty of edge cases to discuss, and that's literally what the vegan community is doing all the time with many proponents of many different opinions.
But we're vegan because we accept this simple logic and wish to minimise it as much as possible. And food is the easiest, since our body doesn't need it. Plenty of vegan solutions available for the many cases where animals are victims. No need for leather, no need for wool, no need for honey, etc. Minimising animal victims is the goal here. It can never be zero, it can never be black and white.
Sand pouring from your teeth, proving my point with every grain.
Opinion. Not a point
Failure to understand simple points made by others, further proving my point
Funniest part is when you call me the ostrich.
You are calling wool shorn sheep victims, with a straight face. You listed honey bees as an example of victims.
You called me pointing out that you arent capable of discussing this topic rationally an opinion, and then proved my point.
You make diglett jealous with how deep into the mantle youve gone.
Did you know that before we bred sheep for wool they didn't need to be shorn? Now if they escape they are likely to die because their wool gets too heavy for them to do anything. They also get castrated and have their tails docked and have mulesing done, almost always without anaesthetic. And Once the wool isn't any good they get shipped off to be slaughtered for meat. Usually in bad conditions that cause many to die en route. Imagine any of those things being done to you and say you wouldn't be a victim of something. I honestly don't know how some people can be so confidently incorrect about something.
You like to consume animal products and you're indifferent to their suffering for whatever reason, it's ok, just stop pretending like anything else is the case.
I did not realize I was talking with a child, but that explains a lot
Actually I'm being a bit silly here because that's just how I am, I don't know who's sending you death threats either but that's a bit over the top. I am actually curious what your counter points are, though. You haven't really responded to anything that's been said other than to call people ostriches. What is your point of view?
I didn't realise I was talking to such a silly billy.
Funniest part is when you called me the ostrich