This is a cow called Fiete. He was rescued from slaughter and lives on a sanctuary in Germany. Hearing him, I am ashamed that he says better in 30 seconds what I have been trying to say for over a decade as a vegan activist. How beautifully, and how irrefutably, he answers the question: Why vegan? But I have another question once you have listened to Fiete. It’s a simple question. It goes like this: if you met Fiete in this field, and you had no need to hurt him — would you rather harm him, or cause him no harm? Here’s why I ask. Humans have no biological need to consume animal products; this is a fact unequivocally confirmed by an overwhelming body of scientific literature. Therefore, when we have access to nutritious plant-based foods, and understand that eating animals is not a requirement for good health, then the choice to eat animal products anyway is a choice to harm and kill animals for pleasure — because we like the taste. But harming animals for pleasure goes against core values caring people hold in common — which is why, for example, we oppose practices like dog fighting on principle. The notion of deriving pleasure from needless violence toward animals is repulsive to us; so how can we justify harming animals simply for the taste of their flesh, milk, or eggs? How can it be wrong to harm for pleasure in one instance, and not the other? The same reasons that compel us to oppose dog fighting compel us to abstain from eating animals we have no need to eat: namely, that it is wrong to harm animals for pleasure, and it is wrong to kill animals for pleasure.
Posted on: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 15:18:08 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015