+Diz Missem: "If people did not eat animals then those animals would have no reason to exist."
Hmm... FWIW, that seems like such a strange notion to me. Do I understand you correctly, +Diz Missem
, that animals designated as being for eating only
have a value when we eat them?
If so, then to my
way of thinking this opens a whole slew of questions. e.g. Did they not have a reason to exist until humans started eating them? If we stopped eating them, would they then be meaningless beings? If a certain species is killed and eaten in one country or culture but it's taboo to do so in another (e.g. as is the case with dogs, cows, cats, pigs, etc.), then where does the being's reason to exist come from in either context?
For myself, I've interacted with and studied animals so much
that I've come to have strong certainties about their self-hood, and much like human-animals draw their reason for existing from that well, it's clear to me that non-human-animals are no different in this regard.
At least, that's how I
see it -- what do you
—☆—★—☆—★—☆—★—☆—★—☆—★—☆—★—This post is one in a series in which excerpts of discussions on veganism from other threads are reposted (or paraphrased) for the sake of expanding the conversation. As always, your thoughts and questions are welcome. See the full collection via the #spommveganchats hash (or perhaps with a more robust search, such as goo.gl/JoxZC ).(for anyone requiring/desiring more context, the original conversation can be found at goo.gl/63476p )#vegan #animalrights #spommveganchatsnoreasontoexist