On Dec 29, 10:00*pm, ex-PFC Wintergreen >
wrote:
> Immortalist wrote:
> > On Dec 29, 7:30 pm, ex-PFC Wintergreen >
> > wrote:
> >> Immortalist wrote:
> >>> On Dec 24, 12:17 pm, ex-PFC Wintergreen >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> DC wrote:
> >>>>> NY Times
> >>>>> In his new book, Eating Animals (Amazon.com:
> >>>>>http://snurl.com/EatAni), the novelist Jonathan Safran
> >>>>> Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
> >>>>> oblivious slacker who waffled among any number of diets
> >>>>> to committed vegetarian. Last month, Gary Steiner, a
> >>>>> philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
> >>>>> page of The New York Timeshttp://snurl.com/ttw8wthat
> >>>>> people should strive to be strict ethical vegans like
> >>>>> himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
> >>>>> including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
> >>>>> finery is nothing less than outright murder, he said...
> >>>>> But before we cede the entire moral penthouse to committed
> >>>>> vegetarians and strong ethical vegans, we might consider
> >>>>> that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok
> >>>>> than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my
> >>>>> Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument
> >>>>> or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it
> >>>>> that way. The more that scientists learn about the
> >>>>> complexity of plants their keen sensitivity to the
> >>>>> environment, the speed with which they react to changes in
> >>>>> the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks
> >>>>> that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit
> >>>>> help from afar the more impressed researchers become, and
> >>>>> the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill
> >>>>> backdrop...
> >>>>> Continued:http://snurl.com/ttw97
> >>>> "vegans" are not "more ethical" for refusing to consume animal products.
> >>>> * In fact, the very fact of being "vegan" is an indication that the
> >>>> person describing himself as such is morally bankrupt, because
> >>>> "veganism" isn't about doing the right thing at all; it's purely about
> >>>> making an invidious, sanctimonious comparison with others and then
> >>>> patting oneself on the back.
> >>> I have been a vegan for most of my life and I do it to promote caloric
> >>> restriction and good old hunger from the gut.
> >> Then you're not a "vegan". *"vegan" = [so-called] "ethical vegetarian".
>
> >> If you're not doing it for alleged ethical reasons, then you're not a
> >> "vegan", you're something else - perhaps a health-fetish vegetarian or
> >> something like that.
>
> > No. A vegan is someone who don't eat animal products nor grains and
> > seeds, nor mucus snot milk,
>
> No. *That's a strict vegetarian. *A strict vegetarian *may* be a
> "vegan", if his motive is ethics. *If not, then he's just a strict
> vegetarian.
>
> "mucus snot milk" - you revealed that your motive isn't even health,
> it's goofy aesthetics.

No. A vegan has traditionally been someone who only consumes fruits
and vegetables.