Would You eat Eggs If...

Hey Flanders thanks for commenting, no offense was taken, so no worries about stepping on my feet. One of the reasons I like this message board so much is because people on here tend to be more open minded and positive about things. Whereas some other vegan boards I've been on people just want to call you names if you don't adhere to the exact extreme of the animal rights philosophy that they specify. ... Anyway, you were saying you don't understand my perspective. Basically I feel this way: "Who cares if you're vegan? "Vegan" is just a word. You could go around telling people you are Papa Smurf and that wouldn't really make a difference to me either. What matters if people are conscious about how their decisions affect the world and then do something about it." In an applied instance, my attitude could be conveyed like this --- say I have a friend who eats meat 3 times a day, but after I give the friend some information he says, "Okay, I want to cut back on meat. I'm going to start eating one entirely vegetarian meal a day." I could respond with something like, "Yes but you are still oppressing the hens, chickens, cows, etc with your other 2 meals..." Or I could say, "Awesome. I'll show you some good stuff to eat for your vegetarian meal." If someone told me, "I'm going to only eat eggs from hens that live in a cage free yard at my friend's farm." I could go into some lecture about how the person is contributing to the social construct of treating hen's eggs as food products and yadda, yadda, yadda... Or I could say, "Cool, good idea." You know, why bother worrying about people who eat eggs from free range hens? When people do that I think they miss the bigger picture. There are billions of hens crammed into factory farms, so why waste energy worrying about some hippies who eat free range eggs?

I have a small problem at the moment where I find it hard to be supportive of anything at all. I generally stay silent unless someone is actually contributing positively if you see what I mean. Veganism in itself isn't a contribution. It is a stark contrast to the majority of lifestyles, given that most lifestyles involve far more killing for no reason. However, just 'not killing' isn't actually a contribution. An analogy i often use is, if i walk down the street and don't kill anyone, I haven't helped anyone. Therefore, I find it hard to praise anything :s unless it's like actual help, like if someone is volunteering some place, or has chosen a career to help a cause etc. But even if someone says they've gone vegan, I don't have much to say. But I feel I should try to be more supportive because obviously I do wish that people would go vegan. I generally just say like '...oh cool' or something. Because to me, it is literally the same as someone saying 'Hey I walked down the street today, I managed to avoid killing anyone for absolutely no reason!'. Again my response would be '...oh cool' because I don't know how to take it.

But Richard, if 99.5% of all people did kill someone while walking down the street each day, and most people thought it was totally normal and acceptable to do so, then you'd probably see the person who did not kill others as more different and "special."

But Richard, if 99.5% of all people did kill someone while walking down the street each day, and most people thought it was totally normal and acceptable to do so, then you'd probably see the person who did not kill others as more different and "special."

I see vegans as different and special, in their rarity, and by contrast to the norm their morals are generally acceptable, but it's not a 'good' thing to not kill things, it's a neutral thing.

EDIT: for instance, it's a bad thing to steal money, it's a good thing to give money. It's a neutral thing to neither take nor give money. And that's what veganism is to me.

Philosophically you are right, Richard. But not doing something is also an action. And by eating more vegetables and fruits etc. and no animal derived food vegans make farmers produce more vegan food and less animals are killed and tortured. And the earth does not get poluted so much. So no action causes actions... (has that become clear? Sometimes my English really sucks!)

Philosophically you are right, Richard. But not doing something is also an action. And by eating more vegetables and fruits etc. and no animal derived food vegans make farmers produce more vegan food and less animals are killed and tortured. And the earth does not get poluted so much. So no action causes actions... (has that become clear? Sometimes my English really sucks!)

It isn't that I am saving anything, it's just that I am not contributing :s There is no reason that those animals would die unless I choose to kill them. It's not like there is an animal in the road about to be hit by a car and I jump out and save it. That would be saving an animal. But just by choosing not to kill an animal myself, it's not saving anything. If that means saving, then everytime I walk down the street, I 'save' everyone because I chose not to kill them, which is a pretty psychopathic way to look at it in my opinion

As I said I agree (philosophically). But not doing something bad is good if you see it in relation to the context (which in this case is the world or peoples "normal" behaviour). If you put the whole "not-killing" out of the context you are right: It is just neutral.

As I said I agree (philosophically). But not doing something bad is good if you see it in relation to the context (which in this case is the world or peoples "normal" behaviour). If you put the whole "not-killing" out of the context you are right: It is just neutral.

Nah I don't think it is good even if it is in context. If 500 people lined up and 499 of them punched me in the face, the one person who didn't punch me isn't 'good', they are neutral. I don't have good or bad feelings towards them. Of course I am relieved, because after 499, I was expecting to get hit, and I might even say 'thanks' to that person. But really, they haven't done anything to deserve thanking.

I see it more technically: If something is better than something bad, it is not good (maybe neutral), but it is good in comparison to the bad.

I see it more technically: If something is better than something bad, it is not good (maybe neutral), but it is good in comparison to the bad.

Yeah it is comparatively good to not kill something than kill it

I think context matters.

Take the 500 people, 499 of whom punch you. Let's say the situation is such that all 500 are expected to punch you. None of them see it as a bad thing. They enjoy it and bond over it and they don't think about how it affects you at all. Then that 1 person questions it and decides not to hit you because he has the insight that it hurts you and he doesn't want to hurt you. His refraining from hitting you in that situation is not exactly the same as someone refraining from hitting you in a situation in which there is no norm that says hitting you is good, and in which the norm actually says that hitting you is bad.

In other words, if a person has to question the norm, see things differently, decide to be different, and sacrifice some personal enjoyment just to do something neutral, I see that as being different from doing something neutral when it's already the norm to act that way.

Heh, yeah it takes a little bit of determination and free-thinking to question the norm. But really the norm is what sucks, and getting away from that is an approach to neutrality. But just because it took a bit of effort to do, that doesn't make it good from my point of view, it still isn't help.

But if the guy didn't punch, but then intervened and stopped the other people from punching then that'd be good. That's him actually preventing something happening. But simply doing nothing isn't good or bad.

Rob if you work on doing a full range on pullups then I'll start working on trying to get some forearm veins like yours! Yesterday at the gym I did a bunch of hammer curls ala Robert "Popeye" Cheeke style

http://www.hindu.com/yw/2004/01/24/images/2004012400020101.jpg

Heh, yeah it takes a little bit of determination and free-thinking to question the norm. But really the norm is what sucks, and getting away from that is an approach to neutrality. But just because it took a bit of effort to do, that doesn't make it good from my point of view, it still isn't help.

 

But if the guy didn't punch, but then intervened and stopped the other people from punching then that'd be good. That's him actually preventing something happening. But simply doing nothing isn't good or bad.

Actually just going vegan is a form of action. By not buying their product anymore, you are making the companies that sell animals and animal products lose money. Hitting them in the pockets will get more attention than standing in front of their building with a sign 24/7 (unless you get loads of media attention, which in turn causes people not to buy their products - which also results in their losing money).

Heh, yeah it takes a little bit of determination and free-thinking to question the norm. But really the norm is what sucks, and getting away from that is an approach to neutrality. But just because it took a bit of effort to do, that doesn't make it good from my point of view, it still isn't help.

 

But if the guy didn't punch, but then intervened and stopped the other people from punching then that'd be good. That's him actually preventing something happening. But simply doing nothing isn't good or bad.

Actually just going vegan is a form of action. By not buying their product anymore, you are making the companies that sell animals and animal products lose money. Hitting them in the pockets will get more attention than standing in front of their building with a sign 24/7 (unless you get loads of media attention, which in turn causes people not to buy their products - which also results in their losing money).

they don't 'lose' money, they just don't get my money. If i went and stole money from their pockets, it'd be action, but that's not what is happening. Again, if you apply this to another company that I don't buy from, for instance, a company that sells bikinis which I don't buy, I am not making them lose money by not buying from them am I? I am just not a customer.

Actually just going vegan is a form of action. By not buying their product anymore' date=' you are making the companies that sell animals and animal products lose money. Hitting them in the pockets will get more attention than standing in front of their building with a sign 24/7 (unless you get loads of media attention, which in turn causes people not to buy their products - which also results in their losing money).[/quote']

 

they don't 'lose' money, they just don't get my money. If i went and stole money from their pockets, it'd be action, but that's not what is happening. Again, if you apply this to another company that I don't buy from, for instance, a company that sells bikinis which I don't buy, I am not making them lose money by not buying from them am I? I am just not a customer.

Of course they lose money -- if you were spending $50.00 a month on their product and then stopped because you became a vegan - they would lose $50.00 that month. If 10 people stopped buying the product, they would lose $500 that month, etc. They would need to find other customers to make up for that loss.

Actually just going vegan is a form of action. By not buying their product anymore' date=' you are making the companies that sell animals and animal products lose money. Hitting them in the pockets will get more attention than standing in front of their building with a sign 24/7 (unless you get loads of media attention, which in turn causes people not to buy their products - which also results in their losing money).[/quote']

 

they don't 'lose' money, they just don't get my money. If i went and stole money from their pockets, it'd be action, but that's not what is happening. Again, if you apply this to another company that I don't buy from, for instance, a company that sells bikinis which I don't buy, I am not making them lose money by not buying from them am I? I am just not a customer.

Of course they lose money -- if you were spending $50.00 a month on their product and then stopped because you became a vegan - they would lose $50.00 that month. If 10 people stopped buying the product, they would lose $500 that month, etc. They would need to find other customers to make up for that loss.

 

they aren't losing money, they just aren't getting money. If you give me $50, then tomorrow don't give me $50, I haven't lost money have I?

Of course they lose money -- if you were spending $50.00 a month on their product and then stopped because you became a vegan - they would lose $50.00 that month. If 10 people stopped buying the product' date=' they would lose $500 that month, etc. They would need to find other customers to make up for that loss.[/quote']

 

they aren't losing money, they just aren't getting money.

If they weren't getting enough money, then they'd have to close down... Not to mention that when a company's profits start going down they get nervous and antsy. That's when they spend more money on advertising agencies to revamp their image, they pay focus groups to see what consumers want and ultimately they pay the advertising medium they decide to advertise on in hopes of getting more consumers and more profits.

If you give me $50, then tomorrow don't give me $50, I haven't lost money have I?

Still trying to get that $5 from me Richard? (I guess inflation has changed it to $50 ?) If you were given $50.00 you have some money to buy food and clothes, but if no one gave you $50.00 how would you buy your food and clothes ?

Of course they lose money -- if you were spending $50.00 a month on their product and then stopped because you became a vegan - they would lose $50.00 that month. If 10 people stopped buying the product' date=' they would lose $500 that month, etc. They would need to find other customers to make up for that loss.[/quote']

 

they aren't losing money, they just aren't getting money.

If they weren't getting enough money, then they'd have to close down... Not to mention that when a company's profits start going down they get nervous and antsy. That's when they spend more money on advertising agencies to revamp their image, they pay focus groups to see what consumers want and ultimately they pay the advertising medium they decide to advertise on in hopes of getting more consumers and more profits.

 

Yeah, if everyone stopped then the company would stop, and that is an ultimate long-term goal that vegans will have. In that case, that would be a good thing. Each vegan does have a tiny contribution towards that goal, that is true, and that is a good thing. But I think that is theoretical more than anything, and who knows if / when that will ever happen :s And the reason why I am vegan is primarily to avoid suffering now, and to not cause suffering by what I am doing. It would be nice if in the future veganism expanded and all cruelty stopped... but that's like a wish rather than what my like, purpose is. If I dive out into a road and save a cow from being hit, that's like direct, I saved it, if it wasn't for me it would have died.

 

I guess another way to look at it is that as there is so much killing, it is 'saving' animals in a way... humans are the danger and by being vegan it could be said that we are saving them from the other humans to an extent. I think it's pushing the limits of the language though to say that!

Would the same view go towards not using the poop from the animals that are on your land for fuel like they do in India or for manure etc? I think it's more of a symbiotic relationship. The soil and earth and trees need the animals and us and it all goes in a cycle. I don't think we need eggs, but the other animals might want them, I certainly wouldn't throw them away or hide them from say my dogs or something.

 

"Green manuring" is all that is required to grow the crops that humans consume. There is absolutely nothing special about animal manure that makes it indispensable. Yes, certainly soil, water, animals etc. are all part of the life cycle, but certainly not "farm" animals. They have been artificially introduced to support animal agribusiness and serve no practical use outside of this realm. Animals that occur naturally in nature will get along just fine without the eggs of a domesticated animal--food chains will accordingly adjust.

I never said anything about "domesticated farm animals". I said animals that are on your land. If you have a bunch of land you are going to have animals on it weather you like it or not. And they're going to be pooping on your land weather you like it or not. Weather they are rescued animals you brought there or just animals that already lived there before you did.

And animals in nature don't care if the eggs they eat are from a wild or domesticated animal. They will find and eat eggs as they already do. Nothing you can do to stop that chain. You can't control what animals in nature eat. If you have rescued chickens on your land you can bet that other animals that live there might come up and steal their eggs or even kill and eat some of your chickens. They might even eat you. We can't control nature by playing bodyguard to every egg, animal or insect in danger from other animals.

I'm so tired of talking to health only vegan/vegetarians who are always just thinking about themselves so much.

 

It's been my experience that vegans are NOT enough concerned about their own health and an environment free of pesticides and animal waste, bird flu, brucellosis, mad cow disease, etc. There is entirely too much emphasis placed on domesticated animal welfare

Well I guess you just talk to ethical vegans then. If someone eats only vegan food for health reasons, then obviously they are concerned about their own health. I've talked and listened to many raw foodists etc. who are totally obsessed with their health and own welfare. And for the most part they seem to eat vegan by default. As soon as they "slip" from eating raw it's with some pizza or seafood or burger or whatever. It means nothing that it is non-vegan, just that it is not "raw". Or someone will come along and say that they had dry hair and brittle nails on a raw vegan diet but as soon as they started adding several raw eggs and raw cheese everyday their hair is now shinny and their nails strong. So 20 other raw "vegans" jump on board and do the same cause they think it will help them look better too and immediately abandon eating all vegan. So the vegan thing was just a very thin shell. They care more about having so-called "perfect" health or how they look then the main philosophy of veganism for the animals and against domestication and commercialism of animals. Or they care more about being so-called "natural" by getting their B-12 from eggs then from an "unnatural" supplement. Then of course they scream and freak out over a steamed vegetable they ate and how it "dulled" their "consciousness" or thinking! Or they just do it for weight loss etc. Some don't even realize they are eating a vegan diet, and don't really know why. So "technically" they are but I still don't think they are true vegans in the spirit of veganism. Yeah, those are the ones I'm tired of talking to.

I just think that there are hardly any situations in our normal lifes where it is impossible to avoid animal derived food.

I have to agree that if you consume any animal or animal byproduct you are not a vegan.

Well, no one in the entire world is vegan then. There are no vegans if we take the technical definition only.

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/dalbook.html#CHPTA

scroll down to Commodities and Defect Action Levels

@Will: Concerning that promoting veganism (or first just eating less animal derived food) I agree to you. But I also think it is important not to forget the long term goal. A friend of mine for example stopped eating meat (still ate fish, eggs and dairy). I encouraged him and after one year he also stopped eating fish. Maybe someday... I do not overload him with information but if he asks or if it seems to me it is the right moment I tell him that he is on the right way and should go one step further.

 

But when you ask:

There are billions of hens crammed into factory farms, so why waste energy worrying about some hippies who eat free range eggs?

I think every action (no matter how small) is important not only for bigger picture but also for the developement of each individual (even it he/she is an a*hole ).

 

I also enjoy this forum because of the different opinions presented without offending each other (in most of the cases...)

I think you and me just have different goals. I don't see anything unethical about a person eating unfertilized eggs left on the ground by free range hens, so I have no reason to want to change the habits of people who those kinds of eggs. As far as my long range animal welfare goal is, it is mainly to end factory farming. I think the most rapid way for this to happen will be for tissue engineered meat (i.e. the kind of meat that could be grown in a factory, but without an animal, just the flesh would be grown) to become mainstream.

I never said anything about "domesticated farm animals". I said animals that are on your land.

Except that you what you stated earlier: "Would the same view go towards not using the poop from the animals that are on your land for fuel like they do in India or for manure etc?" implies a commercial enterprise that involves domesticated animals such as cattle.

This whole argument would be obviated if there were no domesticated livestock to begin with--something I stressed from the very beginning.

I never said anything about "domesticated farm animals". I said animals that are on your land.

 

Except that you what you stated earlier: "Would the same view go towards not using the poop from the animals that are on your land for fuel like they do in India or for manure etc?" implies a commercial enterprise that involves domesticated animals such as cattle.

 

This whole argument would be obviated if there were no domesticated livestock to begin with--something I stressed from the very beginning.

How does that imply a commercial enterprise? Again I just said the animals that are on your land. I didn't say anything about a commercial enterprise.

I related to what they do in India because it is not a practice here in the US to use waste for fuel as they do elsewhere. You can even use your own. Just have a compost toilet on your land. It is a great alternative fuel.

Good point Nik. I agree with what you're saying.