There are some animal advocates who say that to maintain that veganism is the moral baseline is objectionable because it is judgmental, or constitutes a judgment that veganism is morally preferable to vegetarianism and a condemnation that vegetarians (or other consumers of animal products) are bad people. Yes to the first part; no to the second. There is no coherent distinction between flesh and other animal products. They are all the same and we cannot justify consuming any of them. To say that you do not eat flesh but that you eat dairy or eggs or whatever, or that you dont wear fur but you wear leather or wool, is like saying that you eat the meat from spotted cows but not from brown cows; it makers no sense whatsoever. The supposed line between meat and everything else is just a fantasyan arbitrary distinction that is made to enable some exploitation to be segmented off and regarded as better or as morally acceptable. This is not a condemnation of vegetarians who are not vegans; it is, however, a plea to those people to recognize their actions do not conform with a moral principle that they claim to accept and that all animal products are the result of imposing suffering and death on sentient beings. It is not a matter of judging individuals; it is, however, a matter of judging practices and institutions. And that is a necessary component of ethical living.
ableist
abolition
abolitionist
ahimsa
animals
classism
education
exploitation
francione
heterosexism
inspirational-quotes
justice
life
moral-imperative
moral-obligation
nonviolence
nonviolence-jainism
peace-making
peace-movement
peace-on-earth
racism
rights
sentience
sexism
slavery
speciesism
veganism
vulnerable
wisdom
