On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:47:18 GMT, Blue Heron > wrote:
>Digger wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:16:21 GMT, Blue Heron > wrote:
>>>Digger wrote:
>>>>On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:28:12 +0100, "Richard" > wrote:
>>>>>"Digger" > wrote:
>>>
>>>Good god Digger, you are the biggest troll a.f.v has seen in a while.
>>>Congratulations.
>>>
>>>Here is just to clear some things up, in case some newbies are reading
>>>this, or in case you honestly don't know what you are talking about:
>>>
>>>There are several differen types of Vegetarians:
>>
>> Before you go on, you might like to look at the subject
>> line of this thread to see that the focus is on whether
>> human breast milk qualifies as proper *vegan* fare,
>> rather than whether it falls under the sloppy, elastic
>> definition of 'vegetarianism.' Being that human milk
>> is an animal product consisting of animal fats and
>> proteins, my conclusion is that it cannot be.
>
>Correct.

Then why, according to you am I "the biggest troll a.f.v.
has seen" while I've taken on and tackled the question in
the subject line of this thread to reach a conclusion you
agree with?

> However, you seem to be rather misguided with regards to your
>definitions of vegan and vegetarian, which involved you claiming several
>times that a) milk was not vegetarian

It's as vegetarian as chicken soup.

>and b) babies could never be vegetarian.

They aren't, so long as they nourish themselves on animal
fats and proteins.

>Now, based on the original definition of vegetarian, as well as the
>common use of it, you are wrong.

The common use of the term 'vegetarian' is so sloppy
and meaningless that one can live almost entirely on
animal flesh and derivatives similar to any other meat
eater and still qualify as a vegetarian of some description.

>I will leave the discussion of "is breastmilk for babies of the same
>speciece provided by the mother vegan or not" up to other people. If
>you are vegan, and you choose not to feed your baby your breastmilk
>based purely on the desire to be a "textbook" vegan, you should have
>your child removed from your care. There is no exploitation in feeding
>your own young the way nature intended, and it is, in fact, the only
>healthy thing to do.
>
>-- Blue