View Single Post
  #40 (permalink)   Report Post  
Digger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:57:03 -0400, "magnulus" > wrote:
>"Digger" > wrote in message ...
>>
>> "It applies to the practice of living on the products of the
>> plant kingdom to the exclusion of flesh, fish, fowl, eggs,
>> honey, animal milk and its derivatives, and encourages
>> the use of alternatives for all commodities derived wholly
>> or in part from animals."
>> http://www.vegsource.com/jo/essays/namegame.htm
>>

>
> That's actually a good definition (if quite wordy- try explaining that to
>anybody when they ask you what a vegan is), but if you just changed "animal
>milk" to "nonhuman animal milk", it would be flawless.


I'm afraid not, because making human milk an exception
to the rule leaves the way clear for any man to regard
himself as a vegan while nourishing himself on it. Vegan
mothers must start being content with the hard fact that
their suckling babe is neither a vegetarian or a vegan.

There's nothing ugly or wrong in feeding a child naturally
with mothers milk and having a non-vegan in the family,
and those who want to assume there is and go so far as
to pretend that the milk they give it is a vegetarian food
are wrong and simply deluding themselves.