Thank you for your well rounded and ernest perspective. That final sentence really gave me pause. And it’s nice to find a corner of the internet where vegans aren’t vilified immediately for existing
Comment on Why isn't it considered vegan to harvest animals who die naturally?
toomanypancakes@piefed.world 13 hours ago
Hi, ive been vegan for a bit over 10 years. I don't think animal parts are for us to use at all. I'm not really sure why you'd harvest animals at all, I don't think normalizing the commodification of others' bodies is a good thing to be doing. If you really can't live without animal parts, that's probably the least harmful way of acquiring them. I wouldn't recommend eating anyone you find lying on the ground though, that sounds like a good way to contract horrible diseases.
Veganism is about doing the most that is possible and practicable. We probably kill insects just by walking, but it's not reasonable to never move again to avoid that. Similarly, driving a car for many people is a necessity to be able to access goods and services, and its not at all practicable to avoid driving for them.
Ultimately, veganism is a moral stance about reducing harm to others as much as you can. It's not a competition, so don't feel like you have to be perfect at it to do good.
UntitledQuitting@reddthat.com 4 hours ago
baggins@lemmy.ca 13 hours ago
Thank you for this perspective!
kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 hours ago
If you don’t make a moral distinction between humans and other animals, it seems difficult to justify scavenging with any logic that couldn’t also be used to justify grave robbing or even necrophilia.
QuinnyCoded@sh.itjust.works 12 hours ago
i saw a really interesting video about biking jackets and the design of them, the conclusion is that molecularly leather is the safest material for abrasion and there’s not really any synthetic replacement that comes close.
What does your perspective (in regard to veganism) have on this subject?
youtu.be/xwuRUcAGIEU
Btw this channel is REALLY entertaining and well written, I’d recommend watching this channel if you get bored sometimetoomanypancakes@piefed.world 12 hours ago
I'd take the risk with synthetic materials, personally. I don't think any amount of danger I put myself in would justify killing someone else for their skin. I have a synthetic jacket with elbow and shoulder reinforcement for when I ride, and that's good enough for me.
I'll definitely check out the video later when I have more downtime though.
SolidShake@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
Back in the way way way way way way way day. Human used animal fur for warmth, and the meat to eat.
OfCourseNot@fedia.io 11 hours ago
There's this Hindu sect whose adherents wear veils, sweep the floor before them, and/or tread very slowly and carefully to avoid injuring, killing or eating any small insects. As you said, it's about doing as much as you can, but if it were a competition they'd win for sure.
FoxyFerengi@startrek.website 10 hours ago
I think you mean Jainism? It isn’t Hindu.
They also have a very strict vegetarian diet, they won’t even eat root vegetables so burrowing insects aren’t disturbes
faintwhenfree@lemmus.org 5 hours ago
I mean defining new religion is always tricky, Hinduism is such a large collection of beliefs, if you go too wide Jainism and Buddhism and Sikhism would unfold into Hinduism and if you go too narrow Hinduism is at best group of 12-13 separate religion.
The deeper you look the more confusing it is, while Jain texts acknowledge certain “Hindu” deities like Indra, other parts of universe building are entirely different, and if they are different where did Indra come from?
Anyway I like the distinction of dharmic religions and then defining sects such as Jain, Vaishnav, shaiva, Buddhism etc etc. They all have the concept of Dharma, Karma and Moksha. So they are all kind of interoperable in terms of lifestyle. There are sects of Hinduism that are more different than mainstream to the point it’d be hard to call them Hindu, but they self identify as Hindu, while there are sects of buddishm that are so similar to Hinduism, it’s unclear why they consider themselves a separate religion. I think at the end the distinctions between dharmic religion are always because of some geopolitical power game.
Yeah but if you ask a jain they’d say they’re not Hindu. So take it for it means.