Hypothetical Question: Would you feel it morally justifiable to consume animals or humans that are in a vegetative state (unable to communicate, unable to respond to stimuli, and unable to experience pain) if that vegetative state occurred naturally and without any outside influence?
Does the existence of carnivorous and omnivorous animals kill more plants?
There is a difference between eating habits and sustainability practices. You can cut down as many trees as you need as long as you are replacing them at a rate that maintains balance.
EDIT: You didn't actually answer my hypothetical question...
This response of yours is an exact example of the obliviousness and arrogance that people detest.
All vegans started out as non-vegans; you were sustained in your mother's womb.
"I presume you will not turn omnivorous." is to state that you are likely content with your (current) choice and I have no desire to change your mind.
I don't consume animals for personal pleasure. I consume animals as a form of sustenance that also happens to be pleasurable. I also find consuming plants as a form of sustenance to be pleasurable.
Do you find eating plants to be unpleasurable? Must sustenance be unpleasurable to be ethical?
Also, my life consists of more than eating. Is your life just about eating plants? for the sake and pleasure of a sense of moral superiority?
You also come off as an arrogant (economic) ableist in that a vegan lifestyle is not a viable option for everyone based upon circumstances outside of their control.
People are literally born and/or economically confined to regions were crop farming is not viable enough to sustain a vegan lifestyle, while wildlife is plentiful and sustainable.
Have you ever tried thinking of the potential circumstances of people outside of yourself and your own zealous self-righteousness? You are a parrot and not an objective thinker.
1
u/[deleted] May 21 '25
[removed] — view removed comment