guillaume wrote:
> Veganism is NOT religion, or even *a* religion. -

Yes, it is.

> There is no unseen
> controlling power or faith in the unproved,

There *is* a faith in the unproved assertion that one is benefitting
animals merely by not eating them.

> as is typical with a religion.

Not all religions believe in "unseen controlling powers." Buddhism
doesn't, yet it's definitely a religion.

> A stated conviction to a particular behaviour is not
> religion.

It is when adherents make absolute moral claims on an axiomatic basis.

> How many people worship MacDonald's?
>
> I suggest you read the whole Wikipedia article, if you haven't, and
> then comment on the whole.
>
> Jay Santos replays part of the article that states that veganism is a
> "secular movement"

Actually, the statement from that article said "Veganism as a secular
movement is a modern idea." That is to say that it wasn't ALWAYS
secular. When it was started in 1944, it was a peculiar conglomeration
of extremist animal welfare positions interspersed with ideas from
certain Eastern religions. Nothing about it has really changed, and it's
still exceedingly doctrinaire.

Among belief systems (religions), it is among the most dogmatic in the
world.

> then you say it's not, and then you replay the same
> "Veganism as a secular movement". Are you confused?

No, *you* are. You're leaving out the rest of the operative phrase:
"Veganism as a secular movement IS A MODERN IDEA."

> I'm not a vegan nitwit, vegan or a nitwit.

I beg to differ.

> - Just trying to gain
> clarity in peoples thoughts. I see irresponsible extracts, apparent
> confusion and now insults.

The most irresponsible "extract" thus far is your editing of what was
posted.