How Plant Sentience Evidence Supports Vegan Ethics

[Guest guest]

Day after day, meat eaters try to discredit ethical veganism with

an astonishing array of pseudo-philosophical protests, but the

recurring assertion that “Plants have feelings, too” is particularly

vexing — especially because meat eaters kill so many more plants than we vegans do in the course of daily dining! Learn more by reading my new blog post, " Minestrone Is Murder? "

Mat Thomaswww.animalrighter.org

[Guest guest]

As evinced by their posts, the typical meat-eater’s response is self-serving

and avoids any kind of personal reflection or moral accountability. The argument

that because plants don’t want to be eaten, there is consequently no

difference in whatever you eat – be that a pig or a Brussel’s sprout – is

so patently false and superficial that it is sickening. It hardly warrants a

philosophical reply.

 

But let’s just take their reasoning a step further: By this sort of logic does

that mean I can eat any animal I set my palate on without any other

environmental or ethical consideration? Can I kill stray dogs and cats and eat

them? Shoot birds and squirrels? Can I kidnap my neighbor’s pet and gobble it

when it leaves their property? Can I clobber monkeys and slurp out their brains

(considered an exotic delicacy in some cultures)? Chop the fins from endangered

sharks and then throw the rest of the carcasses away (as they do in Japan)? Can

I comb the oceans with 5-mile nets that drag up tens of thousands of sea animals

(including dolphins and sharks) and then throw away 90% of them because those

species don’t serve a market demand? Can I factory-farm animals like chicken,

pigs and cattle, raising them in overcrowded and abominable conditions,

engendering epidemic diseases like mad cow disease, bird flu and swine flu, as

well as causing 75% of the

river and water-table pollution in the USA, with no second thoughts or

governmental regulation?

 

Certainly, no need to bother about the amount of unspoken and unlimited

suffering from the billions of butchered animals every year, right? It’s the

same as cutting down blades of grass…

 

Why stop at animals? Can I eat aborted human embryos? Can I slice up and roast

captured “unlawful enemy combatants†because they have nowhere else in the

world to go? Can I eat vegetarians because “vegetarians taste better� Can

I butcher and eat my mother???

 

This is the slippery slope you get on with such bogus logic. The fact is that

throughout human history and in every culture there have been so many ethical

distinctions and practical considerations and taboos as to what we should or

should not eat. Otherwise, why not become cannibals? It is therefore in

everyone’s interest to become cognizant of and then rethink such ethical

principles, thus raising our societal standards to a more civilized level.

 

The recent World Climate Summit in Copenhagen has now universally established

that global warming is the most critical issue facing our modern civilization.

That behooves each one of us –every individual on the planet – to minimize

our carbon footprint. So there is no getting around it: vegetarianism is the

most efficacious subsistence strategy to achieve that.

 

It is estimated that at least 18% of greenhouse gases result from livestock

production. If we can live by directly eating plants rather than living off

hundreds of animals (that consume even more plants than a human does), it

actually becomes a moral imperative to become vegetarian by that token alone.

Global climate warming demands sacrifices from everyone, especially from the

most gluttonous of us all – American meat-eaters and American gas-guzzlers.

 

So get over it. There are indeed far-reaching environmental, ethical and karmic

consequences in whether you choose to whack a pig or instead pick those Brussels

sprouts. The Buddha taught to follow the path of inflicting the least harm.

That’s pretty much akin to the Golden Rule or Ethics 101; it is spiritual, it

makes sense and it is practical.

 

Get enlightened, go green, and go veg!!!

 

Sri (Irvin Collins)

 

--- On Tue, 12/22/09, Mat Thomas <ma> wrote:

 

> Mat Thomas <ma>

> How Plant Sentience Evidence Supports Vegan Ethics

> baarn , " BAV mail list "

> Tuesday, December 22, 2009, 10:36 PM

>

> Day after day, meat eaters try to discredit ethical veganism with

> an astonishing array of pseudo-philosophica l protests, but the

> recurring assertion that “Plants have feelings, too†is particularly

> vexing — especially because meat eaters kill so many more plants

> than we vegans do in the course of daily dining! Learn more

> by reading my new blog post, " Minestrone Is Murder? "

>

> Mat Thomas

> www.animalrighter.

> org

>

[Guest guest]

Even if plants were found to have a degree of sentience (something which is by no means established), they do not have nervous systems.  It is hard to conceive of how something lacking a nervous system would experience pain. 

 

And, even if it WAS established that green beans feel pain, one would still want to be a vegan for the reason vegans have cited all along:  It takes many more plant calories to produce a calorie of animal flesh and thus, by being a vegan you are saving plants too.  The global warming arguement, that factory farming is a very significant contributor to global warming, only strengthens the case for veganism.

 

Stephanie 

On 12/23/09, Irvin Collins <srila108 wrote:

 

 

 

 

As evinced by their posts, the typical meat-eater’s response is self-serving and avoids any kind of personal reflection or moral accountability. The argument that because plants don’t want to be eaten, there is consequently no difference in whatever you eat – be that a pig or a Brussel’s sprout – is so patently false and superficial that it is sickening. It hardly warrants a philosophical reply.

But let’s just take their reasoning a step further: By this sort of logic does that mean I can eat any animal I set my palate on without any other environmental or ethical consideration? Can I kill stray dogs and cats and eat them? Shoot birds and squirrels? Can I kidnap my neighbor’s pet and gobble it when it leaves their property? Can I clobber monkeys and slurp out their brains (considered an exotic delicacy in some cultures)? Chop the fins from endangered sharks and then throw the rest of the carcasses away (as they do in Japan)? Can I comb the oceans with 5-mile nets that drag up tens of thousands of sea animals (including dolphins and sharks) and then throw away 90% of them because those species don’t serve a market demand? Can I factory-farm animals like chicken, pigs and cattle, raising them in overcrowded and abominable conditions, engendering epidemic diseases like mad cow disease, bird flu and swine flu, as well as causing 75% of the

river and water-table pollution in the USA, with no second thoughts or governmental regulation? Certainly, no need to bother about the amount of unspoken and unlimited suffering from the billions of butchered animals every year, right? It’s the same as cutting down blades of grass…

Why stop at animals? Can I eat aborted human embryos? Can I slice up and roast captured “unlawful enemy combatants” because they have nowhere else in the world to go? Can I eat vegetarians because “vegetarians taste better”? Can I butcher and eat my mother???

This is the slippery slope you get on with such bogus logic. The fact is that throughout human history and in every culture there have been so many ethical distinctions and practical considerations and taboos as to what we should or should not eat. Otherwise, why not become cannibals? It is therefore in everyone’s interest to become cognizant of and then rethink such ethical principles, thus raising our societal standards to a more civilized level.

The recent World Climate Summit in Copenhagen has now universally established that global warming is the most critical issue facing our modern civilization. That behooves each one of us –every individual on the planet – to minimize our carbon footprint. So there is no getting around it: vegetarianism is the most efficacious subsistence strategy to achieve that.

It is estimated that at least 18% of greenhouse gases result from livestock production. If we can live by directly eating plants rather than living off hundreds of animals (that consume even more plants than a human does), it actually becomes a moral imperative to become vegetarian by that token alone. Global climate warming demands sacrifices from everyone, especially from the most gluttonous of us all – American meat-eaters and American gas-guzzlers.

So get over it. There are indeed far-reaching environmental, ethical and karmic consequences in whether you choose to whack a pig or instead pick those Brussels sprouts. The Buddha taught to follow the path of inflicting the least harm. That’s pretty much akin to the Golden Rule or Ethics 101; it is spiritual, it makes sense and it is practical.

Get enlightened, go green, and go veg!!!Sri (Irvin Collins)--- On Tue, 12/22/09, Mat Thomas <ma> wrote:

> Mat Thomas <ma>> How Plant Sentience Evidence Supports Vegan Ethics

> baarn , " BAV mail list "

> Tuesday, December 22, 2009, 10:36 PM > > Day after day, meat eaters try to discredit ethical veganism with> an astonishing array of pseudo-philosophica l protests, but the

> recurring assertion that “Plants have feelings, too” is particularly> vexing — especially because meat eaters kill so many more plants> than we vegans do in the course of daily dining! Learn more> by reading my new blog post, " Minestrone Is Murder? "

> > Mat Thomas> www.animalrighter.> org>

-- " Our task must be to widen our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. "   Albert Einstein

" The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the ways its animals are treated. "    Mahatma Gandhi