Sometimes veganism can be wrapped up in association with liberal tattooed hipsters, or the natural, raw food movement and even violent radical animal rights activists. But, the truth is that veganism can be for anyone. Being vegan means avoiding using animals for food, clothing or any other purpose. Vegans don’t eat any animal products such as meat, seafood, dairy and eggs. If you believe that an animal shouldn’t have to suffer and/or die for your next meal or your new outfit, then veganism is for you. Let’s take for example cow’s milk. Before I became vegan, I didn’t really realize that cows must be pregnant for them to produce milk. In order for them to stay consistently pregnant, they are artificially inseminated. Then instead of the milk being given to her newborn calf, we take it for our drink. In most cases, not shortly after the calf is born, it is taken from its mother. If the calf is female it may be raised as a milk cow. If the calf is male it may be raised in a small crate where it cannot turn around or lie down comfortably, in order for its meat to remain tender. It is slaughtered as a calf (only months old) so that it can be served as veal. So, the next time you get something to eat or go shopping, think about what the animal went through for you and consider going vegan. Check out: www.vegan.org and www.farmsanctuary.org/issues/factoryfarming for more.
This article appears in Aug 6-12, 2009.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Okay–I’ve read this several times. This can’t be real. I have an eight-year old who is more analytical with a deeper vocabulary and a wider world experience. If this is an example of what veganism does for thought processes and reasoning, I need a burger, quick!
So far as poor reasoning is concerned, it is the guest and not the author at fault. The guest’s argument is an ad hominem and nothing more. We are told that the author isn’t analytical enough, but where exactly does her analysis fail? We’re not told. Instead, we’re treated to a childish round of name calling. Perhaps the guest should have called upon his/her deep, analytical eight-year old to write a rousing refutation of the author, because his/her’s is an abject failure. (Mind you, I threw in the word abject lest the guest accuses me of having a subpar vocabulary as well.)