Vegans and eggs

[ConsciousCuisine]

I think it's too easy to get purist and dogmatic about veganism. Is veganism not about animal welfare? If a person owns a chicken, the chicken lays an egg which is unfertilised and will eventually rot, what harm is there to eat it. What matters is the welfare of the chicken and the owner and the environment.

And another thing... how many people here have rescued battery chickens and given them back a life? Isn't that wonderful? She sounds a good women to me.

Yes, she's a good vegetarian woman and that's a great thing indeed!

I agree that if a person is not repulsed by it and the chicken has abandoned the egg and doesn't mind if it is taken (just as it doesn't mind if its excrement is cleaned up and taken away) then there would be little harm in that act. It would not be a "vegan" act, but there would be little harm, all the same.

However, some people (vegans, mostly) believe that animals are not here for our use and to use them or thier products is a foul practice under any circumstances... :/ Some of these same people would compost the eggs or feed them to the chickens (just as some animals and humans eat thier placentas) instead of eating them themselves, believing that they aren't ours for the taking.

[Pilaf]

Even if I raised the chickens myself, I won't eat animal protein again for the crippling health risks associated with such things.

[On the Coast]

It does'nt sound like anyone disagrees with the idea of folks making their own decisions to eat eggs, but I'm having a hard time understanding if some folks think this is okay as a Vegan?
IMHO - eggs, cheese. honey, sour cream, chicken broth, casein, etc. etc. etc. - are all animal products. Therefore, if you eat them you are not Vegan. And if you eat them and call yourself Vegan, you are doing harm to other Vegans by making it that much harder to reeducate all the folks who understand Veganism from an egg eating point of view. Eat eggs if you want, or hamburgers, or children, but do'nt say your Vegan while you're munching my arm........

NMP
(No More Posers) - :mad:

[Plunder Bunnie]

But I would say it's exactly this dogmatic ideology that causes problems. Once again, I note nobody on here saying that they *don't* eat imported fruit and veg. I think people should try to engender the spirit of veganism rather than get caught up with the semantics of the meaning. Veganism isn't about diet.



Anybody can follow a doctrine what vegans need to do is encourage compassion.

Thats very true. I totally agree with you. People get way to obsessed with labels. No matter WHAT we do, we are all making something or someone suffer, what we have to do is try to limit that suffering the best we can as conscience human beings.

[ConsciousCuisine]

Once again, I note nobody on here saying that they *don't* eat imported fruit and veg.

Okay, I'll bite. All the produce I buy comes from veganic, sustainable, locally-grown family-owned farms.

[ConsciousCuisine]

Good for you CC. however, I very much doubt that if you were to expose the contents of your house to scrutiny, that you would come out totally whiter than white. And this is my point. Whilst it's helpful to be a vegan, it's not helpful to be self righteous and pious.

And anyway, to grow yourself is even more sustainable... ;)

See, this is exactly the bullshit I get really tired of. You ask a question and when I answer it, you pull out the self righteous and pious platform. I never claimed to be "whiter than white" and have never said I am better (or worse) than any person, vegan or not. Don't hate on me because I make every effort to be a conscious consumer and live as cruelty-free as I can.

I am really tired of people (here, on other forums) acting as though I feel I am better than others when all I am doing is *my* personal best, which is what I encourage *all* to do :mad:

[Plunder Bunnie]

See, this is exactly the bullshit I get really tired of. You ask a question and when I answer it, you pull out the self righteous and pious platform. I never claimed to be "whiter than white" and have never said I am better (or worse) than any person, vegan or not. Don't hate on me because I make every effort to be a conscious consumer and live as cruelty-free as I can.

I am really tired of people (here, on other forums) acting as though I feel I am better than others when all I am doing is *my* personal best, which is what I encourage *all* to do :mad:

Here here!!!! Veganism, to me, is all about causing as little suffering a possible. Everyone should try to do this, vegan or not. We shoudl just all try our best and congradulate each other on doing so. We are all only human beings here after all!! Do what you can, dont judge others on what they cant.

[John]

I think it's too easy to get purist and dogmatic about veganism. Is veganism not about animal welfare? If a person owns a chicken, the chicken lays an egg which is unfertilised and will eventually rot, what harm is there to eat it.

I know that this is a long thread--but come on! We just discussed this.
You assume that no harm is done to a chicken by stealing her eggs--but you are wrong. I am not being puritanical or dogmatic. I am saying that even if someone is exploiting chickens humanely, that person is still exploiting chickens and not doing charity.

Sure, we live in a complicated word where a ships carrying food hit whales, and birds and insect get poisoned by agrochemicals, but we have to draw a line somewhere. Vegans try their best not to use animal products.

Now, you can talk about scavenging carrion and harmless ways of satisfying a taste for blood, but the truth is, vegans have the honor of saying that we thrive without eating any animal flesh. We are showing the world that it is possible to live without eating animal flesh; without using animal skin and hair, and by doing so, we are creating a new way of life and an example for the present and the future.

[Plunder Bunnie]

If you're a vegan for your own honour then I hope you feel a sense of achievement. However, everything gets exploited on this planet. Everything. There is a food chain, billions upon billions of organisms from the smallest to the biggest rely on the death and exploitation of other living organisms. I think you're lucky you live in a country where you have the choice to be vegan, some people don't. The same people that are exploited by trades such as cotton, bananas, coffee, sugar... staples of a vegan diet. Some people still eat to survive... as part of the food chain.

Veganism is not a diet and it belittles the spirit of the cause to suggest such.

And exactly how can you quantify the harm to the chicken who has lost her egg, especially in the context of being owned by a loving family. The world out there for wild animals is not the world according to humans... it's savage, unjust and definitely not based on vegan principals.

your getting pretty defensive. Your just like everyone else here, hurting things by your own act of living. I imagine the vast majority of people here relaize this too, i sure as hell do. You assume i dont think about it? It dosent bother me constantly? I do care. I sponser a child with world vision and donate to wwf every month, although i can barely afford it and it takes up most of my paycheck. We do what we can.

[DianeVegan]

I will admit that I haven't read all the posts on this thread so perhaps this hasn't been brought up before.

Egg layer hens don't grow on trees so they must come from somewhere (you can even order them by mail) that also produces MALE layer roosters. Guess what? The roosters aren't desirable to eat so they get killed almost as soon as they are born (or thrown in a dumpster to starve to death).

Eating eggs (even from your "happy", lovingly cared for chickens) supports an industry that KILLS unwanted animals for the sake of profit.

And the layers are killed after they stop laying eggs. How many people do you know who keep hens actually continue to care for them after they stop laying? Hmm. That's a lot of work for an animal who's only worth to most is her ability to lay an egg.

Just some thoughts.

[GloomCookie]

I am well aware of the by-products of the egg laying industry. I'm a vegan and have been for 12 years. "Egg layer hens don't go on trees" I got sold one of those trees the other day by ConsciousCuisine are you telling me i've been swindled?

In fact I take it back what I said about veganism not being a diet. I think it should rebranded as simply that... 'The vegan diet' entirely suitable for people who see themselves as paragons of virtue and compassion by restraining themselves to reading labels. If aint vegan it's evil, a bit like all them "Wrong doing folk" from the middle east.

It's so much easier this way... don't you think?

Congratulations on being the first vegan I've met who seems to revel in putting down the people who are there to support and agree with him.

Do you really, seriously believe that every vegan apart from you goes around polishing their halo and looking down on other people? You might get some, the way you get holier-than-thou Christians etc but the majority of us (and no one I've seen on here) feel the need to pretend to be something they're not so why force the issue and try to start an argument?

[foxytina_69]

eggs are not meant for us to consume so why would we consume them, regardless of if the chickens care or not. they arent meant for human consumption, so if they are to sit there and rot, that is what mother nature intended. mother nature didnt create all of her creatures with an idea of them eating eachothers menstural cycles, milk, etc. we are meant to eat what we are meant to eat, and i will not consume eggs because i am human, and i wasnt meant to consume them.

i dont consume produce from other countries. i get all my produce from my local farmers market.

veganism isnt about diet, its about a lifestyle that causes the least harm possible to all living creatures, and including in that is not consuming animal products. regardless of where the hell they came from.

cc, im sure this person is just a troll trying to start a debate, and frankly the only self righteous bitchy person here is whats their face and to be honest, none of us should play their little game any longer. this person gets off on being rude, calling people names, and by promoting the eating of animal products if they come from happy chickens. no thank you. sorry hunny, your game is over and noone cares anymore. ta ta darling. enjoy your bitchy high righteous little life.

[abrennan]

eggs are definitely not for human consumption, they are for the reproduction of the creatures that lay them. Eggs are part of the reproductive process of other beings.

Humans are herbivores. Herbivores don't eat eggs.

Stop calling Cog505 names NOW or I'll sort you out.

Cog505 if you stop being so provocative you'll find you draw less flack from people.

Antony

[foxytina_69]

http://veganforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1329 :rolleyes:

[Plunder Bunnie]

"Eggs are not meant for our consumption" Under whose authority do you write this? Has god told you this? If you want to help end the suffering of animals, telling people we aren't meant to eat eggs just aint going to cut it as an argument.

True enough, but we can all agree here that eggs are meant for reproductive purposes, and that animals do eat them. However, the problem arises when people begin to use animals soley as products, and care little or none about their health and well being. I see nothing wrong with having a chicken companion, and , if she allows it, taking her egg. I may not do this myself, but it wouldnt bother me if someone else did.


Can you show me *one* instance where i've called someone a name... just one. Or even a personal attack? I've been debating veganism and been getting called names for doing so.

You call this debating? What you are ACTUALLY doing is attacking people and then ignoring their responses to your attacks. i am very much open to debates, that is why i am, and probably wasteing my time doing so, writing this. Debating means that you lsiten to both sides, and respond to what the other person is telling you, and do not simply continue to repeat yourself when we have responded to what you have said. So far all you have done is make broad assumptions without even really talking to anyone on this forum to get their veiws. You are personally attacking us all by making outrageous comments you havent even researched. I do realize that my very existance as a north american causes suffering to others, and i try to must to limit that suffering, as we all do and should continue doing.
You have personally offended CC, a intelligent vegan woman. you would realise this is you decided to talk to her rather then dish out judgements.


We're all adults on here... I didn't know this was a back patting club for vegans to big each other up. If you really want to do something positive for veganism, in my opinion, challenge exactly why so few people are vegan, engage them, adapt and be less dogmatic and cynical.

Once again, assumption. YOU are infact the one being cynical. The very fact that you mean this vague assumptions and attack everyone for doing something or believing something YOU percive them to believe makes you look like a fool.
I am in no way dogmatic and am constantly evaluating my personal beleifs, and that is not limited to veganism. I go insane trying to figure out exactly what i beleive and can never be 100% either way, and dont want to be. You are the other hand seem to assume you are right. Assumption is an ignorant tool. Dont use it here and expect me to respect you.



I could sit here all day telling you all what a great job you're doing (which I sincerely believe you are) but why? If you've got courage in your convictions as vegans and you truly believe in the rights of animals and the protection of our natural environment, what I say shouldn't matter.
[/QUOTE]

What you are doing is not encouraging anyone. you are simply making vegans look miltant and incredibly judgemental to nonvegans. This makes it harder for people to make the tranistion, when people like you are saying its never enough. I may be alot of things, but i am not a moron. I know what i beleive and will not let someone like you make uneducated statements like this about me or others i communicate with. You really need to grow up and accept others before passing your self rightous judgements.

[abrennan]

chickens are distressed by the removal of their eggs, contrary to popular belief they are not stupid

[Plunder Bunnie]

chickens are distressed by the removal of their eggs, contrary to popular belief they are not stupid

I know that. Ive had chickens almost all my life. Often it does not distress them, because when they are unfertilized they leave them to rot. I am one of those people that is first on the scene to argue that chickens are very intelligent, because they are. I would never take an egg from a chicken that showed to remote chance of nesting, or becoming distressed. have you ever tried to take an egg from a chicken that was nesting? Youd better be wearing a suit of armor, because in my experience, if they want the egg, youll know.

[Plunder Bunnie]

Even by quoting the biological you can't absolutely state that "eggs aren't for consumption" You could say "Biologically it's not healthy for us to eat eggs" Which I would happily agree with. But to state it absolutely, is wrong. It's like George Bush telling people he's on a mission from god to rid the world of terrorists.

Thanks for the advice, but im not here to argue the biological problems of egg consumption. Its unethical, if people dont understand that, then we simply have different perspectives.



Listen, I actually love you guys. CC, please accept my apologies if you're upset. And plunder Bunnie, even though you called me a fool (I can add that to the various others i've been called :) ) my messages were in no means aimed at anyone personally.
[/QUOTE]

I said you were acting like a fool. There is a difference.

[Korn]

In fact I take it back what I said about veganism not being a diet.
Do you want to change the definition of veganism, and give 'vegan' a new and different definition than it has had for 60 years? Or do you think that there are dietary reasons that vegans don't want to use fur?

And btw, eating eggs doesn't become more OK because some people eat bananas that has travelled half way around the world, does it?

[Korn]

My point was, Korn... that a banana is more environmentally damaging, causes far more misery and suffering and more deaths due to pesticides, land clearing and other intensive farming methods.

Wearing cotton from India, buying TVs from Japan and iPods from USA all causes pollution, but that doesn't change my views on eggs, honey, meat or milk. If you want to compare two situations in a discussion about eggs, it's a lot more relevant to compare eating eggs with not eating eggs, than eating eggs vs. eating bananas.


Why is anybody a vegan... is it the spirit or mere definition? Hmm... I'd say if it's interesting for someone to find out if they can be defined as 'vegan' or not, knowing the definition of vegan is is a good start. If you don't know the definition of vegan, how can you possibly find out if or why you are a vegan? 'The spirit' is of course essential, but if we talk about 'vegan spirit', and have two different definitions of 'vegan', we may not talk about the same spirit, right? ;)


please don't patronise me with answers about fur I'm not interested in patronizing anyone, but as you know, vegans are and have always been against using fur, leather etc. In other words, they have always been know to consider veganism to be about a lot more than diet. If you want to or try to change this, you actually work against the vegan movement.

You contradict yourself when you write 'I think it should rebranded as simply that', because 'rebranding' suggest that you want to change the definition - and at the same time you write 'I take it back what I said about veganism not being a diet'. If veganism would be a diet, rebranding wouldn't be necessary, would it?

You know veganism is about more than what people eat (it's also about avoiding fur, leather etc) - but you seem to want to change that.

If veganism would be only about diet, what would you then call people who are both against eating animal products AND are against using fur, leather etc (for the same reasons that they don't want to eat meat)?


It's so much easier this way... don't you think?
Circa 60 years after Watson and friends invented the word vegan, lots of people know that vegan is about more than food.

Rebranding/redfining vegan would need both the establishishment of a new, different definition of 'vegan', and also the invention of a new word that describes what Watson and his buddies defined as vegan, and make this new word known - worldwide.

That's not my definition of 'so much easier'.

[Korn]

'Why is it a lot more relevant to compare eggs with not eating eggs.' It's more relevant when the topic is 'eat eggs or not eat eggs'. If you mention to a meat eater the health risks involved in eating meat, they sometimes say 'Well, I think talking in mobile phones is unhealthy'. It probably is, but they use it as an explanation or excuse for doing something else (eating meat) which is bad for their health. In your example, you write that you 'see nothing wrong with having a chicken companion, and , if she allows it, taking her egg. I may not do this myself, but it wouldnt bother me if someone else did.' Hens have been 'trained' during many generations to 'allow' people to 'take their eggs. Wild birds usually never 'allow' humans to take their eggs. Eating eggs is not part of being vegan, an has never been, so when you write that it wouldn't bother you if someone took eggs from a hen (if she 'allows' it), and also that you take it back what you said about veganism not being a diet, it looks to me like you just want to stir up a discussion by arguing against established vegan viewpoints - you even declare that it's 'wrong' to state that eggs are not meant for consumption in a forum basically consisting of people who don't think eggs are 'meant for' consumption...

[abrennan]

Even by quoting the biological you can't absolutely state that "eggs aren't for consumption" You could say "Biologically it's not healthy for us to eat eggs" Which I would happily agree with. But to state it absolutely, is wrong. It's like George Bush telling people he's on a mission from god to rid the world of terrorists.

Listen, I actually love you guys. CC, please accept my apologies if you're upset. And plunder Bunnie, even though you called me a fool (I can add that to the various others i've been called :) ) my messages were in no means aimed at anyone personally.

Ah you're a funny fellow Cog505.:)

You don't want me to speak in absolutes but you do this yourself:) you need a better debating style:) merely being provocative isn't rounded enough.

It seems that people here must reject "I'm just making a point. Something for people to think about" and " Ironic message[s]" I believe that they would much prefer that you get to the point and then they would discuss that with you.:)

Anyway back to my point: What I say about eggs not being for human consumption is too absolute but you say that it is "wrong" to state it that way, thats a fairly absolute statement to make.

Anyway, my opininion is that I think both our statements are correct, only that yours is limiting and secondary . Here's why: Eggs existed as a method of REPRODUCTION (which is their purpose) for millions of years before humans came on the scene.

The purpose of an egg is to reproduce and to feed the being they are reproducing until it can get out and feed itself. The purpose of the egg is NOT to be eaten by another being, even though this can occur.

The reason why, as you say: "Biologically it's not healthy for us to eat eggs" is because the creature that became humans spent millenia of developement NOT eating animal products. Hence for humans to eat animal products including eggs interferes with the bodies natural ability to maintain homostasis. This is why the consumption of eggs by humans is unhealthy. Humans eat eggs becasue they can, not because they should. :)

Anyway it seems that, as you say yourself, you "would happily agree" with me that "it's not healthy for us to eat eggs", for me this pre-supposes that we should not eat them.

Now, in your response you misquote me. I did not say as you quote that "eggs aren't for consumption". Have a look I said that eggs aren't for HUMAN consumption. They are however for consumption by the creature who they grow and develop. They can be consumed by carnivorous creature who would steal them.

None of this has anything to do with George Bush. This is another are in which you need to hone your debating skills.:) As an aside the Palestinian leader has stated that George said nothing of the sort. It's a poltical and media ploy to make george look bad. I don't think he needs help. For me to say that eggs are not for human consumption is nothing at all like George saying God told him what to do.:D

Now we come to the crux of our interaction. We have, in your own words, "misunderstood [your ]intention." I agree. I think you mean to say that environmental concerns are vegan concerns. You seem to say that you think that some environmental concerns far outweigh the issue of someone eating an egg from a chicken they have rescued. I want to agree with that, with reservations. My reservation is this. It is no waste to let the egg rot. That is the argument of people who WANT to eat eggs. There is no waste, the egg returns to its component part in the earth. It's not wasted. I hear people using a similar argument. They prepare lots of food and gorge themselves on it and make themeslves feel sick because it would be a waste to leave it.

I think you will find many people here who agree that environmental concerns loom large. But it is a dangerous political game to try and weigh one against the other. They are both important. I think that to be a vegan means that you live in such a way that comprises both these.:)

To end I think its great that you seek to stimulate a discussion. I applaud you for that. But please do it more directly, you will find that there are many intelligent people posting here who would engage with you in that, it will be to the benefit of us all to observe it and to participate in it.:)

thanks for joining in, You were in the chatroom last night but left just as I came in. Did you come back to chat

Antonydebater

[John]

You aren't going to get much more out of me on this trifle, but anyhow. . .

Coo505, your goal here seems to be to to put people down--but why?

Suppose I am not even a vegan but in fact a meat eater.

I would still know that a label on eggs calling them vegan does not make them vegan.

I would know that producing eggs takes a toll on a hen's body.

I would know that people exploit chickens in various ways with various levels of cruelty.

I would know that good people exploit chickens.

I would know that vegans certainly don't consider themselves perfect people since the whole premise of their way of life is one of reflection and self-improvement.

I would know these things because vegans made it clear to me that they don't eat eggs. :rolleyes:

[foxytina_69]

ill repeat myself. eggs arent meant for human consumption. biologically, we ARENT meant to consume eggs, as you can see plain and simply by the structure of our anatomy. my body, being a human, was not meant to consume eggs. why in the hell would i eat something my body wasnt designed to eat. you wont see a rabbit in the wild take a chickens egg and say oh the chicken doesnt mind. why? because rabbits dont eat eggs. humans dont either. we just chose to. i would rather stick with my biological aspects and that seems to be very clearly herbivore. if you dont like me showing you that you were meant to be a herbivore, then maybe you shouldnt be vegan in the first place.

again, like i said already, if a chicken leaves an egg to rot, it shall rot. that is the way mother nature intended it.

[GloomCookie]

'again, like i said already, if a chicken leaves an egg to rot, it shall rot. that is the way mother nature intended it.'

How blessed the man with plenty.

I really doubt you'd ever find yourself in a situation where eggs were the most viable food source.