whack vegans - part II

Quick session:

So I was still jerking off over the subject of the previous post, and I came across a problem with my theory about how some vegans and vegetarians are too persistent. In the example of going over grandma-ma's house, what would you expect a person to do if his/her grandmother cooked a person? Obviously, you wouldn't expect the person to eat it, simply because eating a fellow person is believed by most rational thinkers to be inherently wrong.

I think that's what it is like for vegans. For them, probably all living, breathing things are equal; there is no heirarchy. So, eating a small rodent is on the same level as eating a person. In my opinion, whether you agree with this or not, it is a fair point of view. It is one of those things, like religion, where you are entitled to what you believe, and you don't have to back it up with evidence or anything like that - it's faith-based.

With religion/spirituality, I don't think anyone's opinion is any better (or more correct) than the next. I believe everyone has a unique faith, even if they are in the same group or religion, so one faith can't be forcibly impressed upon another. Therefore, I try my best not think of faith beliefs (religion, ethics, ethics regarding diet) that are different than mine as 'wrong' (unless they infringe on somebody else's human/demecratic rights). So, therefore, I must respect 'genuine' faiths.

By genuine faiths, I mean faiths that aren't used to make you feel superior, and/or to label others as inferior. A vegan who labels people who eat meat as lower forms of life, or a religious fanatic who oppresses other groups do not have genuine faiths.

All done.