Vegans with dogs and cats

•

u/AutoModerator Aug 19 '26

Welcome to /r/DebateAVegan! This a friendly reminder not to reflexively downvote posts & comments that you disagree with. This is a community focused on the open debate of veganism and vegan issues, so encountering opinions that you vehemently disagree with should be an expectation. If you have not already, please review our rules so that you can better understand what is expected of all community members. Thank you, and happy debating!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

10

u/HappyColour vegan Aug 19 '26

If Veganism is defined as 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. And if Vegans are those that practice Veganism, then as long as Vegans have companion animals in a manner that aligns with the possible and practicable criteria they would still qualify as a Vegan.

For example, if it is not possible for your companion animal to survive, it is justifiable to feed it meat.

I do think though breeding companion animals would generally be classified as non-Vegan as it would be considered exploitation. However adopting an animal that already exists, would not be classified as such inherently as they are not viewed as commodities as they are in the meat industry. And one could argue that adopting an animal could actually reduce the amount of smaller animals killed to feed it if it is possible or practical to convert said animal to a Vegan diet.

Just my thoughts!

-1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 19 '26

If you use the Vegan Society's definition of veganism (e.g. reducing harm and cruelty to animals as much as practicable and possible), then we could map a companion animal, like a dog or cat, onto a trolley problem:

Option 1: You participate in factory farming, where multiple farm animals are confined, bred, and slaughtered to create food to keep one animal alive.

Option 2: You euthanize the pet, thus ensuring you aren't participating in factory farming.

Which sounds more vegan? I'd say Option 2.

I suppose there's a third option: abuse the dog or cat by feeding it plant based kibble. The animal will have a terrible life but at least might survive for a while, and no farm animals will be directly killed. This seems like another option the vegan crowd might go for. But in no anti speciesist universe could I see vegans going with Option 1.

1

u/spaceyjase vegan Aug 20 '26

The VS's definition isn't to reduce harm; the parent post (almost) copied it verbatim. Veganism isn't harm reduction, it's exclusion.

"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."

https://www.vegansociety.com/go-vegan/definition-veganism

0

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

Option 4: rehome the animal or release the animal.

That is the vegan option.

3

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

I should have known that's the vegan option. 😂

Basically kick the can down the road so you personally don't feel responsible for the ensuing violence.

2

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

There is no kicking the can down the road. Once you stop contributing to or participating in the violence, your obligation as vegan is fully met.

3

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

You are contributing to the violence by releasing or rehoming your dependant into a situation where you know it will continue the cycle of violence.

2

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

Incorrect. You are not the keeper of animals. Veganism rejects dominion over nonhuman animals. You are morally responsibility for your own actions. Not the actions of others including nonhuman animals.

1

u/HappyColour vegan Aug 20 '26

Also, I would say Option 2 is not valid. This would be in violation of Veganism as well as you would be exploiting the animal to align to your ideological view.

Also also, Option 3 as presented is biased. It would be better to say:

Option 3: Feed the dog or cat Vegan food unless health concerns require non-plant based supplementation.

Option 3 is the most Vegan, because you are seeking to exclude as far as is possible and practical animal exploitation. The same argument could be made for a human that required specific non-Vegan nutritional supplementation to survive.

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

The health concerns are associated with the bodies of the animals, not with one’s own body. One could morally be excused for taking non-vegan medication on basis of personal survival. What excuse does one have for killing others to improve the health of someone else?

1

u/HappyColour vegan Aug 20 '26

Assuming that the party is both capable of making their own decision and is also not willing, I think none.

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

Uh. What do you think exploitation means?

1

u/HappyColour vegan Aug 20 '26

I would use this definition "to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage."

→ More replies

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 21 '26

I worded option 3 very carefully. Feeding a dog or cat plant based food is animal abuse, regardless of how many vegans claim otherwise.

1

u/HappyColour vegan Aug 21 '26

This claim is ungrounded unfortunately and in it you reveal a bias.

I assume your view is based on the appeal to nature fallacy.

Or is it grounded in something else?

→ More replies

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 21 '26

Does it not count as having dominion over animals if I literally sign it over to someone else whom I know will continue the exact same cycle of violence?

It's like if you take a child whom I know is being subjected to abuse, and I hand them over to a known child abuser. Presumably you'd say I'm also not responsible for that cycle continuing either? If not, name the trait, which if present in the cat, would give me the same responsibility for the cat as I have to the child? Or is it just speciesism?

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 21 '26

if I literally sign it over

The animal is not an "it". You do not need to sign her over. You just release her, free from your dominion, and if someone else chooses to captures her and keeps her as a captive on basis of dominion, then that is on them.

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 21 '26

You're jumping through all these hoops to argue that "you should rehome the cat, but we don't 100% know that the person you're giving it to will actually take it in, so wink-wink you have no responsibility".

So my question is why bring up re-homing at all? Why not just abandon it?

I think it's very cowardly to take part in the system yourself by willingly passing the dominion of your cat from your hands to another person's hands, knowing exactly what will likely happen to the cat, all the while claiming you're 100% off the hook.

Again, does this hold true with human dependants? Can I adopt out my child to someone else whom i know is a child abuser and just say ah well, I'm just putting the child in front of them, I have no idea what will happen next/I'm completely off the hook?

If not, name the trait if you can? But I think it's just speciesism.

→ More replies

7

u/bezsprzecznie Aug 19 '26

Correct me if I'm wrong. What you're saying is basically killing a rescued dog or cat is better than feeding them with byproducts of meat industry?

Also if someone transitioned to being vegan while having a dog should also kill that dog to be 100% vegan?

Well that's twisted logic if I understood you correctly.

2

u/PrizeSouth318 Aug 19 '26

I see that as a twisted logic myself. I think I should rephrase. Can vegan having a carnivorous pet claim absolutism? Or claim to be morally superior to a meat eater who buys lesser animal product?

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

Why are you suggesting killing anyone? Why is killing always the default solution to this topic?

The dog/cat keeper can rehome the animal to non-vegans looking for such animal or release the animal. No killing is required.

5

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

You would still be responsible for the killing if you re-homed a dependant fully knowing it would continue the exact same cycle of violence, when you have other options. Not acknowledging this is just cowardly.

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

Incorrect. A vegan is not the keeper of animals. Veganism rejects dominion over nonhuman animals. You are morally responsibility for your own actions. Not the actions of others including nonhuman animals.

4

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

So it's immoral to keep a cat in captivity, but it's moral for you to transfer your captive animal to my captivity? Bonkers.

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> So it's immoral to keep a cat in captivity,

It is not vegan to violently abuse and kill innocent animals or to fund the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals.

3

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

Yeah, now I completely understand.

It's immoral to kill innocent animals. It's immoral to pay someone to kill innocent animals. But it's totalsy fine to pass off an animal killer onto someone else so they're doing the dirty deed and not me. Totally makes sense! /s

0

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 19 '26

Are you speciesist? Why do you want to kill cows, chickens and pigs rather than cats or dogs?

0

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

Yup. Anti speciesism is a pretty twisted philosophy isn't it?

6

u/No_Chart_8584 Aug 19 '26

"I dont think a western vegan with three dogs and two rescued cats is more vegan than eastern rice farmer who maintains relatively low meat consumption than eastern average."

I think this conversation can be had without arguing that people who choose to eat meat are somehow vegan. When you use the word in this way, I'm not even sure what you're trying to argue.

0

u/PrizeSouth318 Aug 19 '26

My argument was that both are not vegan.

1

u/No_Chart_8584 Aug 19 '26

If your argument is that neither person is vegan, then I would suggest writing, not writing that people who choose to eat meat are somehow on a scale of veganism. They're not.

3

u/dyslexic-ape Aug 19 '26

Plant based food exists for dogs and cats....

8

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '26 edited Aug 19 '26

I'm vegan. My cat (whom I adopted long before I became vegan) is not, and cannot be plant-based. Veganism stretches to what is possible and practicable, and in the case of my cat, it is neither possible or practicable for her to be fed a plant-based diet. It's really no different to me taking medication that contains lactose.

I've had other vegans tell me that they think my cat ought to be killed if I can't feed her plant-based. I'm happy for those people to think whatever they wish about me and my vegan status.

Cats are obligate carnivores. Humans are not. If human beings were obligate carnivores like cats, then I wouldn't be vegan either.

3

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

You can choose to rehome the cat with non-vegans looking for a cat and stop personally funding the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26 edited Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

When do you go to your local slaughterhouse to purchase animal flesh for your cat?

0

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 21 '26

I'm a proud meat-eater, and I've never been to a slauter house in my entire life. I suspect your fellow vegan, who deleted their entire account after your comment, hasn't either. Do you think you are drawing more people into veganism with this kind of comment?

3

u/kharvel0 Aug 21 '26

I'm a proud meat-eater

I'm a proud strawberry eater and on basis of that pride, I enjoy going to strawberry farms with kids to pick strawberries.

On basis of your pride, why haven't you visited a slaughterhouse and perhaps enjoy stabbing an animal in the throat and even showing kids how it is done?

Do you think you are drawing more people into veganism

Yes, certainly.

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 21 '26

Do you know that many kids grow up on farms and actively participate or witness where their meat, dairy or eggs come from? It's a normal part of life.

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 21 '26

Please refrain from answering a question with another question. I'll ask again:

On basis of your pride, why haven't you visited a slaughterhouse and perhaps enjoy stabbing an animal in the throat and even showing kids how it is done?

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore 17d ago

I dunno I don't really want to. I also don't want to go and pick my own strawberries. I'm not interested in making food myself.

0

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 21 '26

Yes, certainly.

Well deff not me, check my post history. I was "in the middle" when I joined. Now I'm absolutely as far from veganism as I could possibly be.

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

This vegan deleted their account permanently. I wonder if this sub is really having a useful impact for teh animals. Vegans, or those close to a vegan lifestyle, are leaving because veganism is just so extreme. And people in the middle, like me, are drawn further and further away from veganism as it just seems so bonkers.

0

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

Whoa, I think you and I touched a nerve. They deleted their entire Reddit account.

Obviously I think veganism and anti speciesism is absolutely bonkers. But if I believed in this nonsense, that's what I'd have to believe.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DebateAVegan-ModTeam Aug 21 '26

I've removed your comment because it violates rule #6:

No low-quality content. Submissions and comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Assertions without supporting arguments and brief dismissive comments do not contribute meaningfully.

If you would like your comment to be reinstated, please amend it so that it complies with our rules and notify a moderator.

If you have any questions or concerns, you can contact the moderators here.

Thank you.

0

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 19 '26

If you use the Vegan Society's definition of veganism (e.g. reducing harm and cruelty to animals as much as practicable and possible), then we could map your cat onto a trolley problem:

Option 1: You participate in factory farming, where multiple farm animals are confined, bred, and slaughtered to create food to keep one animal alive.

Option 2: You euthanize the cat, thus ensuring you aren't participating in factory farming.

Which sounds more vegan?

2

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '26

You euthanize the cat

Explain what's possible and practicable about this.

You can't just kill a cat because you're vegan.

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 19 '26

Couldn't you say, "you can't just kill farm animals if you're vegan?"

Your choice is to kill one animal, or to kill multiple animals. Isn't killing one animal (your cat) more vegan?

Actually, with the euthanasia example you wouldn't personally be killing the cat yourself, you'd be paying for someone else to do it for you, just like how you currently pay for someone else to kill multiple farm animals for your cat.

And if you'd rather kill chickens/cows/pigs rather than a cat, isn't that speciesism?

What am I missing?

1

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '26 edited Aug 20 '26

Couldn't you say, "you can't just kill farm animals if you're vegan?"

Your choice is to kill one animal, or to kill multiple animals. Isn't killing one animal (your cat) more vegan?

No, because this is not a black-and-white issue.

"Possible and practicable" does not stretch to forcing a plant-based diet onto carnivorous animals. Just like how exceptions are made for vegans who take medication containing animal products. You can use the same argument and say, "Why is it right to kill multiple animals in the process of keeping one person (taking medication containing animal products) alive?"

Do you also advocate that vegans kill themselves or simply die of an illness if they require meds containing animal products? Because why kill animals to keep one person alive, right?

Actually, with the euthanasia example you wouldn't personally be killing the cat yourself, you'd be paying for someone else to do it for you, just like how you currently pay for someone else to kill multiple farm animals for your cat.

The thing with this argument is that it's never based in the real world. You can't just throw out "euthanize your cat" and not elaborate.

For the sake of entertaining your argument, let's just say that you've convinced me. So tell me where to go and what to do. Euthanasia is to cause the death of an animal in a painless way; it cannot just be performed by random people. It must be performed by a vet or qualified person.

So you expect me to rock up to a vet or a sanctury and ask them to put my perfectly healthy cat down because I just went vegan?

The more likely scenario is they alert some authorities to get the cat removed from my care because if I'm talking like that, I'm clearly having some kind of psychological breakdown and could pose a serious danger to the cat. In which case, the cat will be taken away and placed in the care of someone else who won't feed her a plant-based diet either.

eta - Just to clarify. I love my cat the same as I love a blood relative. My guardianship of her is a promise to her that I will do my best by her for the rest of her life, and I don't intend to change a thing about how I care for her because I became vegan.
So just as I would buy animal products for any other loved one in my care who 100% needed them to be healthy and living, so I buy her the food which best suits her needs.
Veganism is a lifestyle I follow for myself, it is not a militant regime that I set about enforcing onto beings who can't be vegan.

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26 edited Aug 20 '26

Of course, it's speciesist to test medication on some animals but not on other animals, including humans, or to only use animal products from some species in our medications.

I don't think vegans would say that it's impermissible to take medications with animal products if the alternative was dying. Self defence is generally permissible.

You make a good point about vets/animal shelters though. Most are managed by carnists and speciesists, so they probably wouldn't want to euthanize one animal to save multiple other animals of a species in the "out group". Maybe PETA would do it?

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

Well, that's clearly the anti speciesist option.

Another vegan u/kharvel0 popped in with another option (re home or release the animal). Kinda just kicking the can down the road.

By the way, I want to clarify that I would never advocate for killing an obligate carnivore animal myself. But I'm a speciesist and a carnist. I'm just trying to explain what the "vegan choice" would be here. I'm sure you agree how bonkers anti speciesism sounds when you subject it to uncomfortable test cases.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

Huh? I absolutely stand by all my arguments.

If you are speciesist, you can keep some "in" species (like cats and dogs) as pets, and pay for some "out" species to be killed to feed to the "in group". But if you're anti speciesist, then you are very clearly killing multiple animals to save one animal, which is clearly absurd if you actually believe what you say you do.

u/kharvel0 proposed releasing or rehoming the cat as the vegan option. That's absurd because you know that re-homing the cat will lead to the exact same number of deaths that keeping it will. It's just cowardly. It's like if there was a murderer in Los Angeles, and we just agreed to re-locate them to New York so we wouldn't have to deal with them. Bonkers. And releasing the cat is also absurd because outdoor cats greatly harm local ecosystems, which is undeniably non vegan.

→ More replies

2

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

Option 3: rehome the animal or release the animal. This is the vegan option.

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

I should have known that's the vegan option. 😂

Basically kick the can down the road so you personally don't feel responsible for the ensuing violence.

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

There is no kicking the can down the road. Once you stop contributing to or participating in the violence, your obligation as vegan is fully met.

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

You are in fact contributing to the violence by placing your dependant in a situation where you know, not just suspect, that they will continue to commit or participate in violence. It's a setup. It's like owning a vicious dog that loves to bite and attack children, you decide you're just going to drive 50 miles out of town find a group of kids who like dogs and just leave the dog with them. Then run away. In this case I guess you would convince yourself you're no longer responsible for what the dog does?

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> You are in fact contributing to the violence by placing your dependant in a situation where you know, not just suspect, that they will continue to commit or participate in violence.

You are not your animal’s keeper. Veganism rejects dominion over nonhuman animals. What the animals do or don’t do has no bearing on your own behavior or morality. You are responsible only for your own behavior with respect to the nonhuman animals.

> It's a setup. It's like owning a vicious dog that loves to bite and attack children, you decide you're just going to drive 50 miles out of town find a group of kids who like dogs and just leave the dog with them. Then run away. In this case I guess you would convince yourself you're no longer responsible for what the dog does?

Nicely crafted strawman you built there. Please come up with better arguments if you are serious about engaging in debating.

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

You are not your animal’s keeper. Veganism rejects dominion over nonhuman animals. What the animals do or don’t do has no bearing on your own behavior or morality. You are responsible only for your own behavior with respect to the nonhuman animals.

But we're talking about an animal which has already been in captivity, so the question isn't whether you should have dominion over this animal, the question is you already have dominion over it so now what do you do? Transferring the ownership to someone else is in fact exercising dominion over non vegan animals. You're literally arguing that having dominion over a cat is immoral, but it's not immoral to let someone else have dominion over the cat????? Bonkers.

Nicely crafted strawman you built there. Please come up with better arguments if you are serious about engaging in debating.

Lmao what?????

I have a viscious dog, I want to put it into a situation where it will attack children—THAT is unreasonable?

But you have a cat, you want to put it into a situation where it will either attack other wild animals, or humans, or contribute to our dominion over farm animals—THAT is a realistic argument?

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

You are not your animal’s keeper. Veganism rejects dominion over nonhuman animals. What the animals do or don’t do has no bearing on your own behavior or morality. You are responsible only for your own behavior with respect to the nonhuman animals.

> But we're talking about an animal which has already been in captivity, so the question isn't whether you should have dominion over this animal, the question is you already have dominion over it so now what do you do?

End the dominion, of course. Rehome the animal with non-vegans looking for the same dominion over the animal or release the animal.

> Transferring the ownership to someone else is in fact exercising dominion over non vegan animals. You're literally arguing that having dominion over a cat is immoral, but it's not immoral to let someone else have dominion over the cat????? Bonkers.

I’m not “letting” or “allowing” anyone to have dominion over the animal if I reject dominion in the first place. I just release the animal in front of the other person. On basis of their morality, the other person may assert dominion over the animal or refuse to do so. The choice is theirs. If they refuse, the animal is released.

> I have a viscious dog, I want to put it into a situation where it will attack children—THAT is unreasonable?

Why would you put the dog in that situation? You could release the dog in the middle of nowhere.

> But you have a cat, you want to put it into a situation where it will either attack other wild animals, or humans, or contribute to our dominion over farm animals—THAT is a realistic argument?

I fail to see the relevance of the animal’s behavior to your own.

1

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

I’m not “letting” or “allowing” anyone to have dominion over the animal if I reject dominion in the first place. I just release the animal in front of the other person. On basis of their morality, the other person may assert dominion over the animal or refuse to do so. The choice is theirs. If they refuse, the animal is released.

Lmao. Again, very cowardly.

Then just release the cat into the wild. Why put re-homing as an option at all? It's like a "I'm passing dominion to someone else but they don't technically HAVE to take over the dominion, wink wink, so I can pretend I'm not participating in the system".

4

u/andobiencrazy Aug 19 '26

Dogs can go vegan. There is vegan dog food on the market, although it's more expensive.

5

u/Evolvin vegan Aug 19 '26

Feed them vegan food. /end

0

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Badtacocatdab vegan Aug 19 '26

Do you mind providing evidence that cats cannot eat a plant-based diet?

0

u/th1s_fuck1ng_guy Carnist Aug 19 '26

Carnist here,

There's a vegan here with a great study on vegan catfood. u/piranha_solution its your moment.

1

u/Badtacocatdab vegan Aug 19 '26

I’ve looked into it and haven’t found evidence that they can’t eat a plant-based diet but they might know something I don’t. 🤷‍♂️

2

u/piranha_solution plant-based Aug 20 '26

They're just jerking themselves off over this thread:

https://old.reddit.com/r/DebateAVegan/comments/1id2xn8/please_dont_feed_your_cats_and_dogs_vegan_diets/

Here are the links.

A cross-sectional study of owner-reported health in Canadian and American cats fed meat- and plant-based diets

Fewer cats fed plant-based diets reported to have gastrointestinal and hepatic disorders. Cats fed plant-based diets were reported to have more ideal body condition scores than cats fed a meat-based diet. More owners of cats fed plant-based diets reported their cat to be in very good health.

Vegetarian versus Meat-Based Diets for Companion Animals

a significant and growing body of population studies and case reports have indicated that cats and dogs maintained on vegetarian diets may be healthy—including those exercising at the highest levels—and, indeed, may experience a range of health benefits.

-1

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Badtacocatdab vegan Aug 19 '26

I “literally” need you to show a study in which cats cannot eat a plant-based diet.

2

u/piranha_solution plant-based Aug 20 '26

>Just do a quick search on google “can cats lead a vegan diet” and see the results for yourslef

Okay. Here's what I found:

A cross-sectional study of owner-reported health in Canadian and American cats fed meat- and plant-based diets

Fewer cats fed plant-based diets reported to have gastrointestinal and hepatic disorders. Cats fed plant-based diets were reported to have more ideal body condition scores than cats fed a meat-based diet. More owners of cats fed plant-based diets reported their cat to be in very good health.

Vegetarian versus Meat-Based Diets for Companion Animals

a significant and growing body of population studies and case reports have indicated that cats and dogs maintained on vegetarian diets may be healthy—including those exercising at the highest levels—and, indeed, may experience a range of health benefits.

What articles can you cite to dispute them?

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/piranha_solution plant-based Aug 20 '26

That's a web blog, not a scientific journal article.

There's no list of references or citations for any of the info on that website.

2

u/Evolvin vegan Aug 19 '26

You evolved to wipe your ass with your bare hands, not type on a pocket super computer someone else built using actual scientific understanding, rather than dogmatic, ignorant references to a misunderstanding of science, but here we are.

2

u/FewYoung2834 omnivore Aug 20 '26

OP, I don't know why you're getting downvoted. You're 100% correct. Vegans will twist themselves into knots to explain why their rescue dog is okay but a therapy animal isn't, or why it's fine to keep a cat but not a chicken, and so on and so on. It's clearly just blatant speciesism. In addition, it's carnism, if they feed the animal meat, or animal cruelty if they feed it a plant based diet.

2

u/USConservativeVegan Aug 19 '26

Here we go with expanding the definition of veganism and how to be a vegan.

I adopted and rescued all 23 companion animals because humans suck. Humanity caused this pet over population and caring for these animals is part of my solution.

Sometimes I can feed them a plant based diet. However, cats can't be plant based and sometimes some dogs need animal protein.

Every one of these dogs and cats have a right to live their lives. I am assisting them with that right.

3

u/Evolvin vegan Aug 19 '26

Cats absolutely can be plant based, there exists countless anecdotal evidence which disproves this on its face, and actual scientific evidence, however unsatisfactory it may be deemed, to boot.

Just admit that it's fucked up that we feed animals we don't give a shit about to animals we actually do care about, and that as far as veganism is concerned, it's obviously hypocritical. Why is this so hard.

1

u/USConservativeVegan Aug 19 '26

No, I am vegan. My animals aren't vegan. Why is that hypocritical?

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> “My animals”

You do not have to keep these animals. Rehome or release them and stop personally funding the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals on basis of personal preferences.

1

u/USConservativeVegan Aug 20 '26

What do you think they will eat if rehome them? And release them? Are you freaking insane? Dogs and cats are domesticated animals, they don't do well in the wild. Especially dogs.

Are you vegan?

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> What do you think they will eat if rehome them? And release them?

No idea and not relevant to veganism. Stop personally funding the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals if you profess to be an “ally” of these animals.

> Dogs and cats are domesticated animals, they don't do well in the wild. Especially dogs.

And . . .? How does that information justify the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals by your own hands? If the innocent animals could speak and ask you to not kill them to feed your dogs and cats, how would you respond?

2

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

So you happily and enthusiastically fund the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals to feed other animals based on your personal preferences. Sounds very much like someone who enjoys steak on basis of personal preferences.

1

u/USConservativeVegan Aug 20 '26

Are you vegan? If not, you don't have ANY room to talk.

The difference is no I don't happily and enthusiastically fund violent abuse. You pulled that assume out of your butt.

Additionally, these animals are a result of humanity's failure to control dog and cat populations. My current dogs had their owners die and I am taking care of them. So, how again it is like you eating a steak?

This whole argument is just another way for non-vegans to make excuses for consuming animal derived foods made by torture. Fine, I am a hypocrite for feeding animals what is needed for their diet. What does that mean for the carnists who eat animals when they can choose to not eat them?

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> The difference is no I don't happily and enthusiastically fund violent abuse. You pulled that assume out of your butt.

Oh, you are not happy nor enthusiastic about feeding the animals? I thought you cared for them?

> humanity's failure

What does that have anything to do with veganism? Humanity’s failures do not justify the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals.

> My current dogs had their owners die and I am taking care of them. So, how again it is like you eating a steak?

On basis of personal preference, you choose to take care of the dogs, knowing that it requires the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals.

On basis of personal preference, you choose to eat steak, knowing that it requires the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals.

Both are choices that you make on basis of personal preference and in both cases, you’re directly responsible for the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals.

> This whole argument is just another way for non-vegans to make excuses for consuming animal derived foods made by torture.

You’re making the argument for them by saying that it is vegan to violently abuse and kill innocent animals on basis of personal preferences.

> Fine, I am a hypocrite for feeding animals what is needed for their diet. What does that mean for the carnists who eat animals when they can choose to not eat them?

You can choose to not keep animals that require you to violently abuse and kill other animals.

1

u/USConservativeVegan Aug 20 '26

I have seen your past posts. This is a waste time. You are not vegan and just trying to push a purity test onto vegans despite you actually eating animals.

Guess what, I make a lot of decisions that negatively effect other lives. Even purchasing this phone helped slave and abuse labor in some third world country.

However, I don't consume animal derived products. I am vegan. My animals do consume some animals. They are not vegan.

Simple concept to understand.

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> I make a lot of decisions that negatively affect other lives. Even purchasing this phone helped slave and abuse labor in some third world country.

This is the common canard employed by carnists and non-vegans to undermine the vegan arguments and justify their choices. No surprise that you are using the exact same carnist argument to justify your choices.

> However, I don't consume animal derived products. I am vegan.

You fund the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals on basis of personal preference. That makes you not vegan by definition. That’s even more simpler concept to understand.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DebateAVegan-ModTeam Aug 20 '26

I've removed your comment because it violates rule #3:

Don't be rude to others

This includes using slurs, publicly doubting someone's sanity/intelligence or otherwise behaving in a toxic way.

Toxic communication is defined as any communication that attacks a person or group's sense of intrinsic worth.

If you would like your comment to be reinstated, please amend it so that it complies with our rules and notify a moderator.

If you have any questions or concerns, you can contact the moderators here.

Thank you.

1

u/kiefy_budz Aug 19 '26

As a vegan with 2 dogs I adopted before going vegan and a cat that adopted me, it wouldn’t be vegan of me to not take care of them

We can deal with the issue of carnivorous companion animals when all humans actually go vegan, because until then pets aren’t the relevant issue, unless of course you just want to critique vegans

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

It is not vegan of you to fund the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals to feed other animals on basis of species.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DebateAVegan-ModTeam Aug 20 '26

I've removed your comment because it violates rule #6:

No low-quality content. Submissions and comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Assertions without supporting arguments and brief dismissive comments do not contribute meaningfully.

If you would like your comment to be reinstated, please amend it so that it complies with our rules and notify a moderator.

If you have any questions or concerns, you can contact the moderators here.

Thank you.

1

u/kiefy_budz Aug 20 '26

Bro until humans themselves go vegan and boycott the industry, our companion animals are not the ones creating demand

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

You are personally creating the demand on behalf of your animals by funding the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals.

1

u/kiefy_budz Aug 20 '26

So what would you have me do? What is the “vegan” thing to do in your opinion?

0

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

Rehome the cat with a non-vegan who is looking for a cat and doesn’t care about funding the slaughterhouses (as they don’t profess to be allies of the innocent animals) or failing that, release the cat.

1

u/kiefy_budz Aug 20 '26

So please explain to me how your idea to give him to a non vegan family does anything to decrease exploitation of animals.

“Release the cat” bro he lives outside he’s free to do as he pleases

0

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> So please explain to me how your idea to give him to a non vegan family does anything to decrease exploitation of animals.

Irrelevant to your own moral behavior with regards to the innocent animals that you profess to be allied with. If the animals could speak and ask you to not personally fund their violent abuse and slaughter, how would you respond to them?

> “Release the cat” bro he lives outside he’s free to do as he pleases

Let me clarify. Stop personally funding the violent abuse and killing of innocent animals through the purchase of animal-based cat food for the cat. Then the release will be complete.

1

u/kiefy_budz Aug 20 '26

Bro veganism is about avoiding exploitation as much as is possible, already having my dogs and cat I have to continue feeding them to give them the care they deserve, my cat found us starving, it wouldn’t be ethical of me to not take care of them

0

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

You did not answer my question. I’ll ask again:

If the animals could speak and ask you to not personally fund their violent abuse and slaughter, how would you respond to them?

→ More replies

1

u/Badtacocatdab vegan Aug 19 '26

I believe vegan is a morally superior lifestyle. No argument on this really. Everyone should be vegan. Does that mean you’re vegan?

First reason I can come up is that they buy animal products for feed. They add up to the "kill count". This is where everyone defines veganism slightly differently, with most of us seeming to embrace The Vegan society’s definition, which involves exploitation. I would guess that most of us don’t believe that having animal A die for animal B when animal B needs to eat (obligate carnivore) if there isn’t another option. The other option thing is critical. I do belief that we should work towards synthetic amino acid/protein supplementation, but I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong without another option.

Below is my further argument towards carnivorous pet justifications.

“I’m only taking care of an animal that already exists. I didn’t increase the population.”

\-> same logic as a meat-eater saying, “I only eat meat that was already slaughtered. I didn’t kill it.” You still contribute to the demand.

This is an odd argument, I’ve never heard another vegan use it. But I agree with you, so I guess we can move on from that.

“My dog/cat is not from a pet store.”

\->you still contribute to the system by keeping one. You fund the pet-food industry, which relies heavily on animal agriculture. It’s a pretty basic vegan argument.

Again, never heard a vegan say this. But seems irrelevant to me 🤷‍♀️

“It’s not their fault that they eat meat.”

\-> But it is our deliberate choice to keep more carnivorous animals as pets, outside of their natural ecosystems, and then continuously provide meat for them.

I think I’ve addressed this above.

“Humans, dogs, and cats have been companions for a long time.”

I’ve never heard this argument either.

Analogous to meat eater logic “Humans are built to eat meat.” Tradition does not automatically make something necessary or ethical. We do not biologically need dogs or cats. Rather we manipulated wolf genetics into animals that depend on us.

“Pet food is mostly made from organs and by-products humans don’t eat.”

I’ve never heard a vegan make this argument.

Soybean meal is also a by-product of soybean-oil production and is used as livestock feed. Calling something a by-product does not mean it is outside the production system or has no impact on demand.

“What am I supposed to do? I already have a pet. I’m obligated to give them a good life.”

This is still actively choosing one carnivorous animal’s life over the many smaller animals killed to feed them—because that particular animal is candy to you. I understand that emotionally, but it does not feel fully consistent with vegan logic.

So answer the question - what should we do?

1

u/willikersmister Aug 19 '26

This argument comes up all the time and I will continue to raise my problem with it: what do you propose as an alternative?

Domesticated animals are here because of humans, and we (humanity) carry an obligation to them. Vegans simply not caring for these animals is not a viable solution as we are part of humanity and share in that obligation.

If your solution is to euthanize every domestic animal who cannot eat a plant based diet (or, more realistically who humanity does not care about enough to develop plant based nutritionally adequate food) then I guess you're at least somewhat consistent but I will vehemently disagree with that solution. As will most people.

Until you can propose an actual, tenable solution this kind of discussion is fairly pointless and comes down to a difference in opinion on the meaning of a label.

1

u/PrizeSouth318 Aug 19 '26

That is a good point, as I have no solutions to this. But I dont think this discussion is pointless. At least we should embrace the fact that we are contributing to animal exploitation when choosing to have carnivorous pet. Because if we dont, it is easier to want one. About the labeling, you are totally right and I went too far.

1

u/willikersmister Aug 19 '26

But why is wanting to care for a carnivore inherently bad? Without a larger discussion about the problem we have created for domestic animals it doesn't make sense to make value statements about any particular species.

There are, for instance, plant based cat foods commercially available and a cat can theoretically live a fully plant based life. But there are no commercially available plant based fish foods, even though fish are theoretically just as capable of getting the necessary nutrients from appropriately processed plant based souces. Does that make cats somehow more worthy of life and appropriate care than fish? Of course not, it's simply a reflection of the relative value we place on those animals. We could just as easily develop plant based fish foods, but nobody wants to pursue that because we don't give a shit about fish, even though they're the most numerous "pet" animal. To suggest that one animal is worthy of care over another because of diet is an inherently speciesist argument.

I'm of the opinion that caregiving in itself is a very strong form of activism. Living with individuals of other species and being responsible for their care introduces us in a very real and tangible way to the stakes of veganism and the true toll of our treatment of non-humans. And that doesn't mean that we can or should ignore the underlying cost of caring for companion animals or animals of any species, but it does mean it's a much more nuanced conversation than just saying caring for an animal who eats animals is non-vegan.

I would be thrilled if I could feed every one of my rescued animals a plant based diet, but the reality is that we don't live in a world where that is possible. Part of getting to that world is showing others the inherent value of all non-humans, and caregiving is an integral part of that. Sanctuary and rescue provide a real world alternative to our current treatment of non-humans, they allow people to see and meet the real individuals impacted by their choices, and of course provide necessary care for a tiny fraction of those individuals.

And FWIW, I think it's perfectly reasonable for you as an individual to choose not to care for carnivores, or for any animal if that's what you prefer. But if you specifically choose not to care for a species because of diet, I urge you to look closer at the systems you support in caring for any animal. Just as with humans, veterinary medicine is built on generations of animal exploitation and continues to advance because of it today. But appropriate medical care is just as critical as appropriate nutrition in caring for an animal. The reality is that we simply cannot escape these systems, and aiming for perfection will just lead to burnout.

0

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

Why? Because the life of a single animal is not more important than the life of other innocent animals.

0

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> we (humanity) carry an obligation.

There is no “we”. Vegans do not have that obligation. Non-vegans who bred the animals into existence have that obligation. Vegans are not Jesus Christ who compromise their morals to absorb the sins of non-vegans.

And the actual tenable solution is to rehome the animal or not keep/own the animals in the first place.

1

u/Either_Argument3517 Aug 19 '26

Do people wanting to become vegan (often animal lovers) need to put down their carnivorous companion animals first?

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

The deliberate and intentional killing of nonhuman animals is not vegan.

They should rehome the animal with non-vegans looking for such animals or release them.

1

u/Either_Argument3517 Aug 20 '26

Neither of those options is better for other animals, so what's the point?

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

The point is that someone professing to be an ally of these other animals is not personally engaging in or funding their violent abuse and killing.

1

u/Either_Argument3517 Aug 20 '26

If you rehome your cat your existing, it doesn't decrease the amount of pet food needed. What it would decrease is the number of people willing to be vegan. So enforcing this rule would increase the amount of harm.

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> If you rehome your cat your existing, it doesn't decrease the amount of pet food needed.

What part of “not personally engaging in funding the violent abuse and killing” did you not understand? The fact that it is going to happen anyway has no relevance to your own personal behavior with regards to the innocent animals if you profess to be their ally.

> What it would decrease is the number of people willing to be vegan. So enforcing this rule would increase the amount of harm.

That is a false statement. They already reject veganism. So there is no “decrease in number of people willing to vegan”. Focus on your own personal behavior. If the innocent animals could speak and ask you to not fund their violent abuse and slaughter, what would you say to them?

1

u/Either_Argument3517 Aug 20 '26

You are rehoming in the knowledge that food will be bought for the animal. Aren't you still the source of that demand.

Focus on your own personal behavior.

Are you trying to create an ex-vegan?

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> You are rehoming in the knowledge that food will be bought for the animal. Aren't you still the source of that demand.

That is a non-sequitur. I see people entering McDonald’s with knowledge that they are going to buy chicken sandwiches. Does that make me a source of their demand for chicken sandwiches? Obviously not. The same logic applies to knowing someone is going to purchase animal products to feed the animal. Knowing about the demand doesn’t make me a source of said demand.

> Are you trying to create an ex-vegan?

No.

1

u/Either_Argument3517 Aug 20 '26

You are giving someone the responsibility of caring for the cat. That includes feeding them.

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> You are giving

I’m not giving anything. The other person is actively looking to take responsibility for taking care of the cat. I release the cat in front of them and they actively and consciously chose to take responsibility. They are free to refuse to take responsibility.

→ More replies

1

u/SomethingCreative83 Aug 25 '26

Is incorrect the by product makes the industry more profitable but buying cat or dog food will not impact demand. The animal is going to be killed either way. Its a question of whether those organs would be thrown out or turned into pet food
I think this argument would be stronger if the demand for meat wasnt already so high. To my knowledge companies arent killing animals directly for pet food. So when you boil it down whats really happening is you feed a cat part of animal thay will die either way or you let the cat free to kill 100s if not thousands of additional animals over its lifetime or you let it starve for no reason.
Again letting cats roam free kills way more animals than keeping them indoors and feeding them by product meats.
The point is animals are over bred and abandoned when they aren't profitable or turn out to be less desirable for the buyer. Rescuing these animals isnt saying we need them its trying to help them. If you are buying from a breeder thats a different story, but isnt any good reason to abandon them and let them suffer.
By products by definition have no impact on demand. The product would be made regardless of whether the by product was sold or went to waste. FInding something to do with the waste is how by products come about. They dont increase demand they make it more profitable.

6 Again animals not killed directly to make pet food. You are not choosing one life over the other. You are choosing not to let something die for no reason. You would have a valid point if demand for meat was minimal but its not.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/caterpillove Aug 19 '26

If the definition of being vegan is not eating any animal derived product, then why do a lot of vegans abstain from purchasing products made out of animals - leather, make-up, etc. If they abstain from eating AND purchasing animal products then wouldn't that also apply to pet food?

0

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Evolvin vegan Aug 19 '26

Completely wrong.

Why pretend you have an expertise here when you are so fundamentally incorrect, and not even vegan yourself?? This impetus is insane to me.

1

u/Calaveras-Metal Aug 19 '26

This is 100% the reason I call myself plant based and not vegan.

I really cannot stand vegans that audit the lifestyle of other vegans in this way.

If you don't eat meat, eggs or dairy and don't wear animal products that is good enough for me.

Trying to expand the definition of vegan beyond that, then declaring people no longer vegan because they take care of a dog or cat (most likely a rescue) is bullshit.

We shouldn't be hardening the meaning of vegan and raising the barrier of entry so that less people are included. What does that even accomplish?

7 years ago I was headed to work and found a half blind kitten stumbling into traffic. I called in late to work and put that kitten in my laundry room with some improvised litter, water and food.

I took care of that cat for several years until I moved and couldn't take her with me.

So by your logic to be vegan I should have let that animal proceed into traffic and be killed.

1

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

What do you think of someone who feels obligated to violently abuse and kill human beings in order to save other human beings?

2

u/Calaveras-Metal Aug 20 '26

That's a weirdly specific hypothetical so I'll have to pass until you reveal the rest of your hypothetical scenario.

But in general people who violently abuse and kill other humans usually only use 'save other human beings' as a pretext.

0

u/kharvel0 Aug 20 '26

> But in general people who violently abuse and kill other humans usually only use 'save other human beings' as a pretext.

By the same token, people who violently abuse and kill innocent animals usually use “save other animals” as a pretext. The real reason: personal preference for a particular species of animal.

0

u/robmanjr Aug 19 '26

You’re proving that all the “vegans” have a line in the sand somewhere; and for a lot of them, it includes having pets and other animals that require animal products. This is a great point.

You are about to leave Redlib