"Killing" plants

[bj355]

Well, I was thinking about the ethics of being a vegan. We're protecting animals, but killing plants. The harvesting of these plants kills animals.

That's not really my point though. Both plants and animals are living. We have more compassion for the killing of animals than plants. However, I'm starting to think it is really just a bias toward a more similar being. Now, I'm sure some of you will say that plants can't think, etc. etc. But when it comes down to it, that's our biased minds with the opinion that if something isn't like us (that it has the ability to think) it isn't as valuable or important.

I was also thinking about the amount of death to plants vs. the amount of death to meat. A cow has about 2000 lbs. of meat. I can guarantee you that most plants aren't that heavy.

Any thoughts?

[CoolCat]

To get a 2000 lbs. cow you will have to stuff her with much more plants than we would eat directly.

[missbettie]

so thats something that meat eaters say, since thats the area you put this post in correct? sheesh...

[Risker]

Now, I'm sure some of you will say that plants can't think, etc. etc. But when it comes down to it, that's our biased minds with the opinion that if something isn't like us (that it has the ability to think) it isn't as valuable or important.

No, that's called science. The issue is the ability to suffer, not to think. Plants do not have brains or central nervous systems, there is no evidence that they are capable of feeling, thinking or suffering.

[maggielassie]

I understand that plants have a life too, but people kill lots more lives by eating the animals who eat the plants. And, yes, I do believe animals can suffer and plants can't. The greenery does not have a nervous system.

[Korn]

people kill lots more lives by eating the animals who eat the plants.

Yes - the maths of this is quite simple: meat eating humans eat almost exclusively plant eating animals. And since it takes a lot of plants to raise a cow, one will 'kill' a lot more plants by eating a cow than by eating plants.

Having said that, I don't think anyone really is worried about 'killing' plants. The only time this pseudo-argument comes up is when someone tries to find an argument living on a plant based diet eating plants. The irony of this is that one of the most known arguments against eating meat has been that it takes a lot more land (and therefore plants) to produce a meat based diet than it takes to produce plant based food.

That's not really my point though.

But your main point is just as invalid, because whether you are concerned about 'living', 'suffering' or just counting lbs. of meat, there will always me more plants 'killed' if you want to survive on a meat based diet instead of a plant based diet. If plants actually could feel the same way we do, or think, of would have the will (and capacity) to escape from someone who tried to eat them - the best way to reduce all that suffering etc would be to eat plants instead of eating meat, again - because converting plants to meat take a lot of... plants!

There are various theories about how much extra land it takes to produce meat compared with producing eatable plants, but AFAIK, everyone who have looked into this agree that it takes at least twice as much land - due to all the plants an animal needs in order to grow. That would be twice as much suffering (according to those who claim that they are worried about plants being hurt when we eat them).

[Andy_T]

Very simple solution, if it really troubles you - become a fruitarian. To eat apples, bananas, pears, nuts, grains, you do not need to 'kill' the plants.
They give those up freely and are interested in you consuming them (and later spreading the seeds, although that might not work out thanks to our current standards of sanitation).

Best regards,
Andy

[harpy]

Good idea Andy - I think I would find fruitarianism quite hard, personally, but for a life-long vegan it might be easier

[vegandingo]

Well, I was thinking about the ethics of being a vegan. We're protecting animals, but killing plants. The harvesting of these plants kills animals.

Any thoughts?

I am unsure what you are getting at. If you are saying that is is equally unethical to kill both plants and animals and therefore eating animals is no more unethical than eating plants then I would say that you need to look into yourself to see why you are a vegan.

Life is a matter of making choices and compromises. If we did not eat at all then we would greatly minimise the suffering we cause to other living beings. The Jains are known to wear face masks to prevent microbes from being inhaled. They also sweep the path before they take each step in order to avoid stepping on insects.

Even by eating fruits we crush the seeds which arguably are living beings waiting to sprout.

Think over the reasons why you are now a vegan and decide for yourself if it is less harmful than eating animals.

Personally, I believe that we have an inherent food quota that is different to the quota allowance of a tiger or a hyena. I have never seen a person run down an antelope and rip it apart with their teeth, nor have I seen a tiger dig up a carrot and blissfully crunch away.

Don't fret over our food quota and put away the guilt.

[pat sommer]

uhhh, anyone else smell troll?

[hedge]

It has been proven that plants react to their surroundings and respond to stimuli, such as light and touch, but whether they feel pain is highly improbable.
Why?
Because they lack the means of escaping that pain.
Plants evolved long before animals, so doesn't it make sense, from a self preservation point of view, that plants would have evolved over time to be able to flee pain and danger?

[vegandingo]

uhhh, anyone else smell troll?

Excuse me? Are you referring to my post? If so, would you care to explain how you see my advice to look within and understand why someone chooses to be a vegan is trolling?

Being vegan, for myself, is not because of fashion or because I want to be seen as being trendy. We have a choice each day to live according to our understanding of the Universe and how we fit into the Great Scheme.

I admit that I am a relative newcomer to the vegan lifestyle as I have only been vegan for the last twelve years. It took me a long time for me to go from being vegetarian since 1973 to becoming a vegan.

Maybe it's different for you?

[hedge]

I think pat was referring to the original poster vegandingo. But troll or not (and I personally don't think the original poster is trolling) it is a good topic for discussion.

[vegandingo]

I think pat was referring to the original poster vegandingo. But troll or not (and I personally don't think the original poster is trolling) it is a good topic for discussion.

You are probably right. Maybe it was directed at the OP.

Troll or otherwise, asking sincere questions is always a good thing. Even insincere questions stimulate discussion, or has the potential to.

If the OP has indeed been a vegan since birth then there is the possibility that being vegan has become too routine.

[Korn]

If the OP has indeed been a vegan since birth then there is the possibility that being vegan has become too routine.

...or always was a routine? If someone is forced to eat vegan food since birth, questioning the habit's they have lived with forever can't be a bad thing.

Troll or not, we know that most trolls explode if they are exposed to light, so I'm not sleepless over the occasional trolls we may have.

[vegandingo]

...or always was a routine? If someone is forced to eat vegan food since birth, questioning the habit's they have lived with forever can't be a bad thing.

Troll or not, we know that most trolls explode if they are exposed to light, so I'm not sleepless over the occasional trolls we may have.

Forced is a matter of perception. My children are being raised as vegans. I know that some people believe that unless I offer them meat then they do not have a choice. I reply that if I give them meat before they understand what it is I am not giving them a choice.

Thankfully, my children are extremely healthy and strong, mentally and physically. It does make me chuckle when my three year old son tells a meat eater to stop eating animals.

Being a parent means that I and my wife must make choices for our children until they are able to make their own choices in a meaningful and mature way.

Trolls are potential vegans. If they did not have questions in their minds then they would not be bothered to come and poke fun.

I don't think that the OP is a troll. If I am wrong then there is no harm done.

[Korn]

Forced is a matter of perception.

Yes, it often is.

Parents simply have to make some decisions for their kids (and do it all the time whether they are aware of it or not), and that certainly doesn't necessarily equal 'forcing' them into something.

I'm of course totally against giving meat to kids. But IMHO there are different ways of not doing that - at least when they are old enough to communicate about it. It's a major difference between saying 'You are not allowed to eat meat' and 'It's wrong for me to spend money on food which both means that animals will suffer and which often are associated those eating it will have higher chance of getting certain illnesses'. Children - even young kids - easily understand that more 'freedom' for someone often means reduced freedom for someone else.

My children are being raised as vegans. I know that some people believe that unless I offer them meat then they do not have a choice. I reply that if I give them meat before they understand what it is I am not giving them a choice.

I agree, and since practically nobody are against eating plants (including meat eaters), and lots of people are against eating meat, at least we aren't 'forcing' our kids to eat something they later in life potentially will be against, as long as the diet is healthy.

[pat sommer]

If I were a silly teenager with nothing else to do but to see who would bite at my provocative question, then, I might have come up with something a little more compelling than post #1.

If anyone actually enjoys debating the merits of the old-chestnut "but plants...", by all means, carry on.

I did check first the profile to see if poster joined just for this thread... No harm as was said. Keeping us on our toes.

[missbettie]

^ I agree.

[Gwydion]

Yup.

PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!

[leedsveg]

PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!

I DISAGREE. FEED THEM TO THE TRIFFIDS!

lv

[Korn]

Short version:
There are cases where we can be 100% sure that a new poster is a troll - and will have their account deactivated + posts removed. The best solution, in my opinion, is that we in all other cases treat them as if they are not (plus consider reporting them as possible trolls).



Longer version: Although my first response, when I saw this thread, was that the poster may actually just be a troll, "silly teenagers' should also feel welcome here. IMO it's a lot better to explain why you think someone's reasoning doesn't make any sense than to call them stupid.

Some questions will pop up again and again - for years, not only because lots of new people go vegan every year - but also because the amount of kids who grow up in a family which doesn't eat meat is increasing.

I believe that the 'Don't eat meat because then you'll kill a lot of plants'-argument usually isn't something someone just comes up with all by themselves. But meat eaters sometimes produce arguments only to try to defend or justify their own meat eating. In some cases, we may see members who post these 'arguments' as if they were their own, only to get some counter-arguments.

*Many* of the "arguments" I've heard pro eating meat seems to have been produced in moments of intellectual/emotional coma. I can't think of any valid reason to eat meat at all, unless possibly in certain extreme situations most of us never will come across. But it's a major difference between saying that an argument makes no sense and to tell someone that he is stupid or silly.

We actually do welcome "silly questions" here, and usually point newcomers to threads where these things already have been discussed.

If meat eaters are silly, almost all of us have been silly (and still are, in many situations). And... being raised on a meat-free diet may mean that one doesn't know much about arguments pro/con eating meat, because one never had to make a choice.

I once were in a city where eating/selling meat etc. was forbidden. If I would have asked a young teenager there why he doesn't eat meat, or presented some of the classical pro-meat "arguments" for them, I'm sure many of them wouldn't always have a good counter-argument ready. So... if you have problems with silly pro-meat arguments, try to avoid these threads or make sure you avoid personal attacks if you discuss with them on this board. Or use the Report-button.

We could have removed all such threads and banned all posters who came up with pro-meat arguments, but instead we have a subforum called "Vegan/non-vegan discussions". When you are logged in, you won't see the threads in that section unless you subscribe to a permission group which allows to to do so. I'm moving this thread over to that section soon, because even if the poster may be a lifelong vegan, the argument he has posted is posted as a pro-meat argument.

The harvesting of these plants kills animals.

That's also a topic which has been brought up a few times... search for existing threads and you'll find out how other members have responded to it.

[sandra]

Hi bj355, I look forward to hearing your views on what everyone has said.
So...... you've been a vegan all your life, may I ask how many years that has been or is that too rude a question?

[pat sommer]

Your judgement Korn, was sound as usual. Just wanted to know if I was the only troll sniffer.
They are welcome to try; just don't feed them

[sandra]

Hi bj355, I look forward to hearing your views on what everyone has said.
So...... you've been a vegan all your life, may I ask how many years that has been or is that too rude a question?

I wasn't holding my breath for a reply to my above post, but the lack of a response has confirmed what I thought all along anyway.

[sable]

So you've been a vegan all your life, and came to think of this just now? That is really weird, because when I went vegan I googled the word vegan and read a bit about it=)

[Starman]

What makes a life valuable? The ability to experience it and feel it. To be aware of it. A plant can't do any of that because it lacks a brain and central nervous system. "Killing" a plant is not the same as killing an animal. The plant doesn't care because there is no individual in the plant to care about it.

[Robinwomb]

Like others here, I find it strange that meat eaters and some ex vegans will argue that one might as well eat animals AND plants because plants feel and have rights too and by vegans not recognizing this they are hypocrites. It doesnt add up or make a very strong case of why we should eat meat. No matter how I look at it, i can not see how consuming yet another species such as animals (which we also have to breed and create life just to do this in most cases) is any more environmentally sound or friendly or morally ok than not consuming them. If there werent billions of farm animals and pets to feed we would still consume far less plant life than breeding and feeding all these animals just for our own benefit. Would we have to grow more plants for people then? Sure. But it would still add up to far less than the amount of plants it takes to feed those billions of farm animals we breed and enslave. I would like to add however that I wish humans took a bit more responsibility when considering our own population and how the Earth will continue to handle us all instead of just killing off and taking over more and more land and animals to accomodate us all.

Being vegan has never been about being perfect and pure and avoiding all suffering. We try to leave a smaller footprint, to reduce suffering as much as possible and to respect the quality of life of others, but also recognize our very existence here means that we are consuming and taking life from something else. The house I live in required digging up land and killing insects and grass at some point for instance. Does it mean I should just do whatever I want because it doesnt matter anyway? I think not.

[LouiseAbel]

Well we've got to eat something, don't we.

What do you think the cow's been eating to get so fat, anyway?

[Brigetta B]

Yes - the maths of this is quite simple: meat eating humans eat almost exclusively plant eating animals. And since it takes a lot of plants to raise a cow, one will 'kill' a lot more plants by eating a cow than by eating plants.

Having said that, I don't think anyone really is worried about 'killing' plants. The only time this pseudo-argument comes up is when someone tries to find an argument living on a plant based diet eating plants. The irony of this is that one of the most known arguments against eating meat has been that it takes a lot more land (and therefore plants) to produce a meat based diet than it takes to produce plant based food.

But your main point is just as invalid, because whether you are concerned about 'living', 'suffering' or just counting lbs. of meat, there will always me more plants 'killed' if you want to survive on a meat based diet instead of a plant based diet. If plants actually could feel the same way we do, or think, of would have the will (and capacity) to escape from someone who tried to eat them - the best way to reduce all that suffering etc would be to eat plants instead of eating meat, again - because converting plants to meat take a lot of... plants!

There are various theories about how much extra land it takes to produce meat compared with producing eatable plants, but AFAIK, everyone who have looked into this agree that it takes at least twice as much land - due to all the plants an animal needs in order to grow. That would be twice as much suffering (according to those who claim that they are worried about plants being hurt when we eat them).

You might find this article interesting.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/michelle...e-say-experts/

As far as the OP, you have to eat something. If nothing else, I'd think it was a matter of choosing the lesser of the two evils. I'm currently reading the book 'Slaughterhouse', and believe me, nothing about harvesting plants is remotely comparable to what happens to animals in a slaughterhouse, and that's at the end of a life of extreme suffering. The two, eating plants and eating animals, are simply not analogous.

[CoolCat]

It's rather simple really, if you are worried about eating plants the response shouldn't be to just eat animals, it should be to go fruitarian and live of the fruits of plants that are clearly intended to be eaten (to disperse and fertilize their seeds). Or you could live of animal dung you find in the wild That would be a good source of B12 actually

[LouiseAbel]

It's rather simple really, if you are worried about eating plants the response shouldn't be to just eat animals, it should be to go fruitarian and live of the fruits of plants that are clearly intended to be eaten (to disperse and fertilize their seeds). Or you could live of animal dung you find in the wild That would be a good source of B12 actually

Really? So if vegetables are sprayed with cow manure while they're being grown, do they not absorb any of the B12?

I'm being serious, by the way. Please don't laugh at me if it's a stupid question.

[Korn]

Hi LouseAbel, - in this thread, for example, plant's ability to absorb B12 from the soil (if present) is being discussed:

http://www.veganforum.com/forums/sho...barley-and-soy

I don't know cow manure is particularly useful, though: human feces contains B12 as well, but 95% are inactive B12 analogues. I don't think there's a reason to assume the B12 in cow manure should be more active than the B12 in human waste. Soil, however, may contain B12 which 'hasn't been used already' (= not eaten by an animal and converted into manure), so under the right circumstances (organic soil, not processed/chlorinated or treated with stuff that kills B12/B12 friendly bacteria and so on), one would most likely find useful B12 in quite a few plants - at least if the food was eaten within a few days after harvesting.

B12 levels in plants that had added 10g dry cow manure (per pot with 2.5 kg soil) increased by a rate between 1.81 and 3.5. That's only 4g manure per kg, and most of the manure is just manure - it isn't B12.

Your question isn't stupid, btw, that topic has been discussed for a few decades already with no firm conclusions. A proper study would need to reveal if the resulting B12 in plants was bioactive for humans, how long it was bioactive (4 days? three weeks?), define what kind of soil that was needed to create useful B12, and look at if eg. cooking (in chlorinated water), freezing, pesticides and so on would kill the otherwise useful B12 in these plants.

[LouiseAbel]

Thanks.

[misssoya]

I have heard this argument few times now and i have rehearsed reply- if you love plants so much, go veg, cos that way less are killed, by feeding animals the plants and eating the animals, many more plants suffer! I have seen a bumper sticker i like it says- I KILL VEGETABLES lol, love it.

[Yellow_Curtain]

most definately YES!!!!

(not sure if it shows up correctly, but this is in answer to the troll comment)

[TarekF]

Heres a debate between Gary Francione and Michael Marder about Plant Ethics. I think Gary Francione makes good points. I dont know where i stand on plant ethics. What is think is that plants are not sentient and though can have many intricate reactions, it is pure anthropomorphizing to assume they are conscious and have any experiences which can be infringed on (as opposed to animals, which i would argue that we are not anthropomorphizing to assume that beings with exactly the same biological structures experience pain and happiness similarly). It is outside of our abilities of observation at the time.

I would be interested to know what Michael proposes as to plant ethics. What could we do? Fruitarianism? Harvesting methods which do not kill plants like grains and such? I really dont know what he proposes that we do. I know that without any structures that give rise to moral impulses and emotions (that humans and animals have), including them in a moral community is tricky and possibly just silly.

Responsibility towards plants may not be terribly far fetched though, say, keeping species alive and maybe a few other things like that.

[CoolCat]

Harvesting methods which do not kill plants like grains and such?

The harvest of grains like wheat and stuff very much destroys the plant itself. Unless you carefully start picking the grains out as you eat them I don't see how they could be mechanical harvested without causing harm to the plant.

Responsibility towards plants may not be terribly far fetched though, say, keeping species alive and maybe a few other things like that.

With 7 billion we can't be anything but destructive to our environment. Alternative grow methods will not meet demand for our ever growing population, and feeding ourselves without farming plants like all the other species do (by roaming and/or small populations per area) has become completely impossible. Reducing our numbers to 200 million like we were for millennia is not really possible, but it would bring so many possibilities. If we are honest to ourselves a population growth/explosion of this magnitude in this time frame with this impact on the environment would be classified by us as a pest when it involved another species and not ourselves.

[Clueless Git]

To get a 2000 lbs. cow you will have to stuff her with much more plants than we would eat directly.

Totaly correct.

A meat eater 'kills' far more plants than a veg*an plus they kill animals too.

[VeganAutumn]

Genesis 1:29.
God provided the seed bearing plants for man as food. They are supposed to be what sustains us. It is my deep reverence for life that keeps me on this path.
Yes, I eat plants - they were put here for the survival of man - not animals.

[Ⓥeganist]

Someone told me once that plants feel pain so if I eat the suffering of plants then they can eat the suffering of animals and there is no difference. I decided to go home and test this theory myself. When I got home, I ran into the kitchen, grabbed the largest potato I could find, went into the drawer and snatched the biggest knife I could and viciously stabbed the potato all around. One thing I noticed with animals that I didn't notice from this potato was there was no screaming, no blood, no fear in IT'S eyes, yes this potato is an it because IT is an inanimate object. The potato didn't seem to be in any stress or struggle of any sort. I hung this potato upside down and it didn't struggle surprisingly. So after stabbing it I thought I would slice the mid section of the potato. I did, and surprise, surprise, no screams and no blood. So I decided to take this test a little farther and boil the potato while it was still intact! First I skinned this potato, not much struggle, blood or crying, then I placed it in the bowling water and yet again, no screaming! This gives me the sense that plants do not feel pain in the same way as animals. You hold a piglet upside down he will scream, put a lobster in bowling water she will scream, stab a kitten over and over again, there will be blood. With the potato, I didn't get these results at all. You can get any of your meat eating buddies to try the potato experiment at home themselves! They would never think twice about doing this to a potato but ask them to conduct the same experiments on let's say that families kitten, the results or feelings would be different towards that individual because a kitten is a someone who feels pain like us, while a potato is not.

[Andy_T]

Veganist,

you're obviously a very cruel person - poor potato ;-)

If people are really concerned about plants' well-being, the answer is soooo easy ... go vegan, and you will consume much less of them, so you cause much less "plant harm".

Best regards,
Andy

[thegreenjudy]

Genesis 1:29.
God provided the seed bearing plants for man as food. They are supposed to be what sustains us. It is my deep reverence for life that keeps me on this path.
Yes, I eat plants - they were put here for the survival of man - not animals.

You are absolutely right and I agree with you. Just be careful with this argument though. In the bible god also allowed people to eat meat after the flood;-)

[VeganAutumn]

You are absolutely right and I agree with you. Just be careful with this argument though. In the bible god also allowed people to eat meat after the flood;-)

When the animals descended from the sky on a blanket, it was made clear that the sin was taken from them. that they were made clean, not that they should be bred and consumed in mass quantity. Furthermore, when Jesus was offered up as the lamb who was slain, there were to be no more animal sacrifices - and that included the consumption of them. In fact, there were two of the original Jewish sects, that kept to the word and did NOT consume meat. (sorry - divinity student here).

Still, with the availability of fresh plant foods today, there is no need for anyone to resort to eating meat. Animal flesh is an acquired taste transferred down from generation to generation. The Bible clearly speaks about the sins of the fathers being passed down generation to generation. I personally believe that the speciesism and torture of so called "lesser" beings is a great part of the sin that has plagued this world. If man stops caring for the animals, how much of a jump is it then for him to stop caring about other human beings?

There is anger, sadness, pain, despair, loneliness, and death associated with the meat that society consumes. There is, likewise, murder, rape, child and spousal abuse, theft, destruction, and basic apathy among our population. The parallels here are not coincidental.

[Brigetta B]

When the animals descended from the sky on a blanket, it was made clear that the sin was taken from them. that they were made clean, not that they should be bred and consumed in mass quantity. Furthermore, when Jesus was offered up as the lamb who was slain, there were to be no more animal sacrifices - and that included the consumption of them. In fact, there were two of the original Jewish sects, that kept to the word and did NOT consume meat. (sorry - divinity student here).

Still, with the availability of fresh plant foods today, there is no need for anyone to resort to eating meat. Animal flesh is an acquired taste transferred down from generation to generation. The Bible clearly speaks about the sins of the fathers being passed down generation to generation. I personally believe that the speciesism and torture of so called "lesser" beings is a great part of the sin that has plagued this world. If man stops caring for the animals, how much of a jump is it then for him to stop caring about other human beings?

There is anger, sadness, pain, despair, loneliness, and death associated with the meat that society consumes. There is, likewise, murder, rape, child and spousal abuse, theft, destruction, and basic apathy among our population. The parallels here are not coincidental.

I cannot agree wholeheartedly enough. In these few short months of veganism, I've felt that the blinders, intentional blinders, have been removed. It is very, very difficult to deal with the awareness of the enormity of the suffering we are causing to animals on this planet. And I cannot help but to wonder what we would be like if we were not a species that would tolerate, or justify, such horrors. And in thinking about that, I find myself wondering how much differently would we treat EACH OTHER, if we were a species that could not tolerate animal 'use'. : (

[Clueless Git]

I cannot agree wholeheartedly enough.

Me neither.

A couple of excellent posts there by VeganAutumn.

In these few short months of veganism, I've felt that the blinders, intentional blinders, have been removed. It is very, very difficult to deal with the awareness of the enormity of the suffering we are causing to animals on this planet. And I cannot help but to wonder what we would be like if we were not a species that would tolerate, or justify, such horrors. And in thinking about that, I find myself wondering how much differently would we treat EACH OTHER, if we were a species that could not tolerate animal 'use'. : (

On a 'religious' bent; The buddha named meat as "the obstacle to great compassion".

Those 'blinkers', the 'cognitive dissonance', 'mental disconnects' or whatever we like to call them .. I think are exactly what the buddha was talking about.

Not that veganism alone is enough to imbue a person with great compassion, mind. Just that anyone who is not vegan will always have an unovercomable obstacle to it.