|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 7:38 am
So, it turns out, whenever I'm confused or upset about something, I start a topic here. What can I say? I like you people, and you often help me to figure things out.
So I have these vegan friends, or rather these friends who have recently become vegans. Who, as so many vegans seems to do, have also been trying to convince me that the only ethical dietary choice is veganism. But they are Pro-Choice.
Maybe I fail at life, but it seems to be that if cattle and chickens should be considered equal to humans, and only eaten if there is no other option (albeit an option that both doesn't taste as good to me, gives my husband a headache, and costs more), then should, you know, unborn humans also be given such rights?
I'm not vegan, vegetarian, or Pro-Life, but I really don't get holding both of these views (veganism and Pro-Choice...ism). Am I the only one who sees an obvious contradiction here?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 7:47 am
What I've heard from other choicers about it, is that the animals are not living off a humans body so therefore deserve to live. In a nutshell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 7:54 am
Beware the Jabberwock What I've heard from other choicers about it, is that the animals are not living off a humans body so therefore deserve to live. In a nutshell. Still confuses me though. I really feel that the two beliefs conflict. I'm sure I hold conflicting beliefs also, I guess (though I try to examine my beliefs to minimize this). But this really doesn't make sense to me. How can honey be unacceptable, because smoking bees on very rare occasions does end up killing one or two (though, of course, almost all of those yummy vegetables and grains were fertilized by those same bees - but "they could just raise bees for that, and not take any honey" - no, I'm not bitter *wink*), but killing an unborn human okay? Unborn humans are, well, human. Livestock has been domesticated by humans, and without us these species would not exist. Zygotes, embryos, and fetii are natural stages of human growth, which every born human has gone through. I don't understand how someone could believe both things at the same time without like, imploding from the conflict. *grin*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:01 am
WatersMoon110 Beware the Jabberwock What I've heard from other choicers about it, is that the animals are not living off a humans body so therefore deserve to live. In a nutshell. Still confuses me though. I really feel that the two beliefs conflict. I'm sure I hold conflicting beliefs also, I guess (though I try to examine my beliefs to minimize this). But this really doesn't make sense to me. How can honey be unacceptable, because smoking bees on very rare occasions does end up killing one or two (though, of course, almost all of those yummy vegetables and grains were fertilized by those same bees - but "they could just raise bees for that, and not take any honey" - no, I'm not bitter *wink*), but killing an unborn human okay? Unborn humans are, well, human. Livestock has been domesticated by humans, and without us these species would not exist. Zygotes, embryos, and fetii are natural stages of human growth, which every born human has gone through. I don't understand how someone could believe both things at the same time without like, imploding from the conflict. *grin*
I remember one conversation, with a friend of mine back in high school who simply informed me that I "couldn't be pro-life unless I was vegetarian." Of course I AM vegetarian, so he felt like an a** after that, but I've always found that idea kind of funny.
I find it somewhat ironic that people can care so much about someone milking a cow, and not care at all about someone aborting a human. But I'm sure they justify it in their minds somehow. Unfortunitally the hidden niches of their mind, I am not able to access. I think there are a couple vegetarian choicers in the guild now, though, maybe they'll be able to explain better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:10 am
Beware the Jabberwock XD I think different people have in their mind different criteria for what each side should kind of... think.
I remember one conversation, with a friend of mine back in high school who simply informed me that I "couldn't be pro-life unless I was vegetarian." Of course I AM vegetarian, so he felt like an a** after that, but I've always found that idea kind of funny.
I find it somewhat ironic that people can care so much about someone milking a cow, and not care at all about someone aborting a human. But I'm sure they justify it in their minds somehow. Unfortunitally the hidden niches of their mind, I am not able to access. Yeah, I need to stop trying to understand the reasoning behind their dietary choices, because it's getting to the point where if I don't just let it drop it's going to interfere with our friendship (since I don't know if I can be a friend to someone who considers me to be "worse than a wife beater" and then still want me to feed their pets while they are gone). But it is so confusing to me that someone could feel that all animals are always worthy of life, but not all stages of humanity... I guess that I have some odd expectations of animal rights activists in general. Beware the Jabberwock I think there are a couple vegetarian choicers in the guild now, though, maybe they'll be able to explain better. That would be nice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:14 am
Worse than a wife beater? Ouch. So people who eat meat are worse than wife beaters and us pro-lifers are on par with the KKK. We make a great team!
But seriously, that's ridiculous. Their mindset is already towards animals having rights over humans, from what I can tell. I mean if you beating your wife is not as bad as eating an animal (I mean I'm vegetarian but I'm fully aware of what we science lovers call 'the food chain') in their minds. Well that's just kinda screwed up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:45 pm
I'm a vegetarian! sweatdrop
Yeah, the main idea - as Jabberwock said - is usually that the animals are not violating someone's rights/bodily domain.
It's as simple as that.
They just don't view a fetus on the same level as a fully developed, living, born animal. Pretty similar to not viewing the fetus on the same level as a born infant, only with animals instead of infants.
There's also the fact that a lot of people who happen to be vegan or vegetarian also happen to have far, far more compassion for animals than for humans.
Animals never do anything wrong. They're just trying to be the best animals they can be.
People, however, can do some pretty horrible things.
True, a fetus hasn't done anything horrible besides exist, which it can't help.
But that extra compassion for animals coupled with the idea that a fetus isn't the same as and is far inferior to a born creature gives you a pro-choice vegan/vegetarian.
At least in the ones I know.
Note: I'm not one of those kinds of pro-choice vegetarians. My beliefs on the subject and the reasons why I'm a vegetarian aren't really what you'd normally expect to hear.
I can explain if someone's interested, but it might be long. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:50 pm
Tyshia2 They just don't view a fetus on the same level as a fully developed, living, born animal. Pretty similar to not viewing the fetus on the same level as a born infant, only with animals instead of infants. Except that infants weren't domesticated for food/eggs/dairy products. And that the argument, used on me at least, was that animals "deserve" to live out their natural lifespan (strangely enough after saying that "cows shouldn't exist") in peace. I just don't see how someone could make such an argument about bees (and cattle, and other domesticated non-pets) but completely disregard it when it comes to unborn humans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 5:44 pm
I find it kind of sad ( now I got the "mad world" song stuck in my head sweatdrop ) that some people give for rights to cows and chickens then a fetus.
That doesn't make much sense to me.
I'm not vegan or vegetarian either. I seen them as food (everything we eat was made from something living at one time or another).
Now that doesn't mean people should kill them for fun or in a inhumane way, I see no problem eating them. We all have to eat in order to survive.
Animals never do anything wrong? Some animals kill each other over a female or to be the "boss", some even eat their own babies.
A fetus doesn't do any of that (it can't).
Now I don't the reasons why some people become vegan or a vegetarian,everybody has different reasons. My friend became one for many reasons, one reason he claims is that it's healthier.
I believe if you eat meat in moderations then you should be healthy.
How can eating meat make you worse then a wife beater? It's just a natural way of life. Somethings dies (we kill it) and then we eat it to survive, just part of the food chain (plants inclued).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 5:51 pm
For me, It's hard to understand how someone can value unborn human beings less than say, a dog or a cat, simply because the animal is not infringing on your bodily domain. What if the animal WAS infringing on your bodily domain? Would you feel right killing it? I know I sure wouldn't.
And that's because I feel compassion for all living beings, not just the ones that I think meet my standards of viability. Not to say that pro-choice people don't feel compassion for all living beings, they just seem to be able to rationalize the killing of a living being to the point where animals, are above them, and the unborn child is looked at as some kind of parasite.
Vegetarianism is all well and good, but is it counterproductive to support abortion as well as be vegetarian or vegan?
I'd like you to explain a little bit more, Tyshia. If you wouldn't mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:47 pm
Maybe they view unwanted feti in the same regards as criminals?
Oh on a side note, I actually am healthier now then when I ate meat, even though it was moderate. I think it has more to do with the individual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:16 pm
Here's a question for pro-choice veg*ans: is it okay to kill and eat an unborn animal? Say, a fertilised chicken egg, or a fetal pig?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 3:53 pm
@ Le Veuve Zin :: For me personally, no. Eating an unborn animal disgusts me more than eating a born animal.
But I wouldn't have much problem with someone else eating those. As long as the mother wasn't harmed. (Unless the mother was killed for food at the same time, I guess...)
@ McPhee :: I'm basically a born-vegetarian. I've never liked the taste or texture of meat. I only ever ate ham on sandwiches when I was little. Everything else made me want to vomit.
A lot of people get all defensive when I say I'm a vegetarian and start talking about how eating animals isn't wrong, and it's kind of annoying. I normally don't mention I'm a vegetarian unless I can explain my views on it at the same time. I agree with them, it's not wrong. But I just can't stomach it.
And as I've gotten older, I've become more and more uncomfortable with eating things that bleed. So, even if I decided I liked the taste, I still wouldn't be able to eat it.
I'm not into animal rights though. I'm against animal cruelty, and I think more humane methods should be adopted in regards to the conditions animals are kept in (like in certain shelters or for animals that will be slaughtered for food), but I'm not at all extreme about it, and I do support animal testing.
Plus, vegetarians/vegans are usually healthier than meat-eaters, as long as you do it right. Vegetarianism and veganism can be dangerous if you don't know how to eat right.
(And for me, there's the bonus that it's pretty damn hard to get a parasite like a tapeworm if you just eat veggies.)
I don't believe it's counterproductive at all to support abortion as well as vegetarianism.
True, they both involve life and the idea that something deserves life, but they're not entirely the same and I can see how one could have different and seeminly contradictory views on the subjects.
@ sachiko_sohma :: When animals fight over females, they're fighting to reproduce. It's a natural instinct, and possibly the strongest natural instinct an animal has. I don't see that as the animal's fault at all, and see no wrong done in wanting to reproduce enough to fight for it.
Eating their own babies? Survival. It's food, it's there, why not eat it?
All animals do that can be considered "wrong" by human moral standards can be explained (or blamed) on survival instincts. The animal is just trying to survive. Who can blame it?
@ WatersMoon110 :: I don't like that argument. It's silly. confused
But perhaps it's that the animal is born already, and the fetus isn't supposed to be there?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 12:47 am
Tyshia2 I'm not into animal rights though. I'm against animal cruelty, and I think more humane methods should be adopted in regards to the conditions animals are kept in (like in certain shelters or for animals that will be slaughtered for food), but I'm not at all extreme about it, and I do support animal testing. I agree, I don't believe animals should get the same rights as people (since there are a ton of laws, like wearing clothes and using a toilet, that go along with those rights), but I am an animal welfare activist. I think it is important that livestock (and other kept animals) are kept in a healthy and ethical way, but I believe it to be completely ethical to kill animals for food (let's face it, plenty of rabbits and other small animals are killed when harvesting grain). Tyshia2 Plus, vegetarians/vegans are usually healthier than meat-eaters, as long as you do it right. Vegetarianism and veganism can be dangerous if you don't know how to eat right. Depends on the person, actually. Some people need more protein that others, like pregnant women. *grin* Tyshia2 I don't like that argument. It's silly. I disagree. Humans created domestic animals, and I feel this makes us responsible for them, forever ("You are responsible, forever, for what you have tamed." -Antoine de Saint-Exupery). In my view, the best way to care for these particular species is to raise them in small groups (smaller than 20 or 30) on good feed, and then eat them if desired, to keep their numbers in check (as any good predator does), as well as to gain substance. Tyshia2 But perhaps it's that the animal is born already, and the fetus isn't supposed to be there? Personally, in the case of my friends, I think that this particular conflict is not really thought through. They are child free, and so support elective abortion. But I guess they don't see the obvious conflict that I do with them being (as well as wishing to force/manipulate others to be) vegan and them being Pro-Choice. At the very least, they won't have to try to justify why breast milk is "vegan" if the mother is, something that always makes me laugh (since humans are animals, and such our milk is still an "animal product" *grin*).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 7:49 pm
I don't think they conflict unless vegans insist that we shouldn't kill unborn animals as well.
If your value on life has to do with being born and independent, then a born animal and a born human are more equal than an born animal and a human fetus.
What I think conflicts even more is someone who believes that animals don't deserve rights based on their intelligence levels, but newborns do deserve rights, even though there are other animals more intelligent than newborns, if this person is also pro-choice based on a fetus's intelligence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
