View Single Post
  #123   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
Robin Robin is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,681
Default OT: Local politics, opposition?

On 23/04/2021 20:11, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 16:05:57 +0100, Robin wrote:

On 23/04/2021 10:54, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:49:50 +0100, The Natural Philosopher


snip
We don't need to eat animals or consumes their excretions or exploit
them in any other way.


I don't know how you define "we" but it patently excludes people who
would die without pancreatic enzymes derived from pigs.

I wonder if you have an advance decision ("living will" as was) that
makes clear you don't want to be treated by them or anything else
derived from animals.


Let's see if this help answer your question:

"Veganism is a way of living which seeks to exclude, as far as is
possible and practicable, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty
to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose."

So, to answer your last question, depending on how old I was, my
potential life span after treatment and what any animal had to endure
to keep me alive, yes, such a will seems a good idea.

I guess to many they are 'just animals', until you kick their dog that
is ...

We (initially) aren't talking about the use of animals for (human)
life and death instances, we are talking about the wanton consumption
and so causing pain and suffering to billions of animals every year
when there is *no need*.

What many don't seem to realise is just how much we rely on the system
of animals being like it was when we first got here and how us and
them ****ting in our own drinking water (pollution in the rivers and
sea) and polluting the very air we need to breath and atmosphere that
protects us isn't good for us?


You first stated baldly "We don't need to eat animals...". You then
state "Veganism is a way of living which seeks to exclude, as far as is
possible and practicable, all forms of exploitation ". And go on to
admit that you would accept in some cases treatment that exploits animals.

That indicates your acceptance that there are circumstances where it is,
as a matter of personal choice, /reasonable/ to exploit animals. So you
accept that there are no absolutes: different people may make different
choices.


PS
I commend to you Gower's "Plain Words". It helped me make the
transition from 6 years in which I wrote only one essay (and that just
for the easy prize money) to 30 years where words ruled.

https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/184/184520/plain-words/9780241960349.html

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid