• 0 Posts
  • 19 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 18th, 2023

help-circle






  • Those scenarios fall under the “as far as possible and practical” clause. Plants and fungi need insects to pollinate them, and microorganisms for nutrients. Veganism isn’t a death-cult, so we have to eat something. Therefore, those insects and microorganisms are necessary.

    Ditto for immune system and hand sanitizer. They are necessary parts of being human.

    Another common one to ask about is animals killed in the process of farming, such as field mice that are caught in machinery. I also recognize those as necessary in the current system, but I do grow some of my own food as a small way to minimize those things, and I believe that if more people cared, we could eliminate that problem. But it’s not something in my power, so I must classify it under the “as far as possible and practical” clause.

    Another is animals that die as a result of roads. My answer to that one is /c/fuckcars


  • Vegan here. Interesting question! I think you’re going to get a different answer depending on the vegan you talk to. Personally, this is the definition of veganism I subscribe to:

    “Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.”

    By that definition, for me, it is not vegan. If the VFT has been grown by humans, and fed insects, then that is non-vegan, because there was a lot of animal suffering that went into growing that VFT. Furthermore, VFTs are not required for sustaining the human body, so the only reason to do this is for human pleasure or something.

    Edit to add: if the VFT was found in nature, I probably still wouldn’t consume it, because 1) I don’t even know if VFTs are edible 2) if they are, I’ve got better food with me that probably caused less animal suffering, and are less morally ambiguous.





  • Grain bowl. Mix one or more from each of these categories into a bowl:

    1. Some sort of grain (white rice, brown rice, quinoa, barley, buckwheat, farro, etc)
    2. Some sort of legume or protein (lentils, beans, peas, chickpeas, tofu, etc)
    3. Greens (kale, spinach, lettuce, etc)
    4. Other veggies (carrots, beets, onion, peppers, tomatoes, okra, etc)
    5. Sauce (salad dressing, hummus, bbq, red pepper sauce, miso dressing sauce)

    Most of these ingredients are dirt cheap, and packed with nutrients and fiber and other goodness.






  • This is the thing. In isolation, enjoyment is a decent argument for anything. But you have to step back and look at the impact of things to see if it’s a good or bad thing.

    In the case of animal consumption, the pros are:

    • it tastes good
    • it’s convenient
    • it means people don’t need to change.

    (People often add “it’s nutritionally necessary” here. I know I did. But that’s a myth. You can get everything you need from plants. If that wasn’t the case, vegans would be unable to live whole lives without issues, but that’s happening)

    The cons?

    1. It causes millions of land animals to be killed every single day, many in a very scary painful way. If you include fish, that jumps up to hundreds of millions
    2. Animal farming contributes to a big portion of the emissions that are causing climate change.
    3. It’s an extremely inefficient way to produce food for humans. Just think: in order to produce one pound of meat, how much input grains/grass/whatever was there? Why not skip the middleman and eat the plants directly?
    4. Industrial fishing is destroying our oceans, which also contributes to climate change.

    I could go on, but I digress.

    But these are the things I came to learn when I went vegan last year. So it came down to a simple question in the end: do the pros outweigh the cons? Do my tastebuds matter enough to contribute to all those problems? The answer was clear enough for me


  • I struggle with using the word spirituality w/ meditation as well, because of the mentioned connotations. But I think this is roughly the definition people use that does kinda fit: “Spirituality involves the recognition of a feeling or sense or belief that there is something greater than myself, something more to being human than sensory experience, and that the greater whole of which we are part is cosmic or divine in nature.”

    And that feeling does resonate with me a bit. I don’t believe in any supernatural or religious deity, but I do believe we’re all part of something bigger in a very literal sense. Meditating and being mindful and reflecting on life are ways for me to remember that bigger whole.

    So in that sense, I’m “spiritual” but I don’t use that word personally.