Reflections of a reasonable vegetarian
Published November 18, 2003
My failure to conform to what is expected of vegetarians includes not swearing off non-food uses of animal products. I have a Eddie Bauer Stine jacket and a leather office chair. No qualms strike when I am buying leather shoes or a new purse, except about the cost.
I consider myself a reasonable vegetarian because I believe I have reached a balance. I'm in no danger of depriving myself of needed nutrients by being an anti-meat extremist. Nor do I hold eating meat against other people. If someone decides to join me in vegetarianism, fine. If another person wants to pig out on beef spare ribs dripping with a chorizo-based sauce, that's fine, too. I'm willing to leave the choice up to the individual.
Brian goes on to say, in regard to the reptilian reprobate,
There is only one way that all of this effort could make logical sense to me: If every decision maker involved is a vegetarian. Going on the (probably safe) assumption that these decision makers (and those who agree that saving the alligator is the right thing to do) are not vegetarians, how to make sense of it? For example, in order to solve the minor problem of their own hunger tonight, these alligator-savers will likely elect to have, say, a chicken killed, when obviously they could have sated their hunger without killing any animals at all, if they truly believe that one shouldn't kill an animal to solve a problem.
As I said before, I don't have a problem with the star of this drama being offed at all. See you later, alligator. I am a reasonable vegetarian.
Note 1: Brian delves deeper into the issue of animal rights. He is looking for a philosophy that negates PETA's: "Animals are not ours to use for food, clothing, entertainment, or experimentation." Read his entire entry here.
Note 2: This entry also appeared at Mac-a-ro-nies.
- Reflections of a reasonable vegetarian
- Published: November 18, 2003
- Type:
- Section: Politics
- Writer: Mac Diva
- Mac Diva's BC Writer page
- Mac Diva's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
Program on the emergence of civilization.
"14 species of large animals capable of domesitcation in the history of mankind.
None from the sub-Saharan African continent.
13 from Europe, Asia and northern Africa."
Favor.
And disfavor.
They point out Africans' attempts to domesticate the elephant and zebra, the latter being an animal they illustrate that had utmost importance for it's applicability in transformation from a hunting/gathering to agrarian-based civilization.
The roots of racism are not of this earth.
Austrailia, aboriginals:::No domesticable animals.
The North American continent had none. Now 99% of that population is gone.
Organizational Heirarchy
Heirarchical order, from top to bottom:
1. MUCK - perhaps have experienced multiple universal contractions (have seen multiple big bangs), creator of the artificial intelligence humans ignorantly refer to as "god"
2. Perhaps some mid-level alien management -
3. Mafia (evil) aliens - runs day-to-day operations here and perhaps elsewhere ("On planets where they approved evil.")
Then we come to terrestrial management:
4. Chinese/egyptians - this may be separated into the eastern and western worlds
5. Romans - they answer to the egyptians
6. Mafia - the real-world interface that constantly turns over generationally so as to reinforce the widely-held notion of mortality
7. Jews, corporation, women, politician - Evidence exisits to suggest mafia management over all these groups.
Survival of the favored.
Movies foreshadowing catastrophy
1986 James Bond View to a Kill - 1989 San Fransisco Loma Prieta earthquake.
Journal: 10 composition books + 39 megs of text files
If you eat meat and wear leather, you are not a vegetarian. It's that simple. You're a reasonable meat-eating, leather-wearer.
The word "vegetarian" used to mean someone who didn't use any animal products at all, even those that aren't fatal to animals. A new word has been derived from that to refer to its original word- vegan. What are they going to call non-leather wearing egg and cheese-eaters if you claim the word? Please, for the love of the English language, have the sense to call yourself what you are.
I don't agree with the leather-wearing bit. That's nonsense. Plenty of vegetarians have not eaten meat but will wear leather, and that's been the case for as long as I can remember.
Vegans, however, don't. They don't eat much of anything, really. Iron tablets would be a really good idea for most vegans, but that's another story.
But Mac, sorry, I have to say this: if you eat fish and seafoods, you aren't a vegetarian. Not even a semi one.
Fish and molluscs are animals.
"Austrailia, aboriginals:::No domesticable animals."
No but with kangaroos and wallabies everywhere they looked, they didn't need to.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/10232)
very reasonable indeed MD, thanks!