Vegetarianism and veganism

Tim, it's probably best that we leave it there then. In my view, I have adequately addressed your objections, but you don't seem to recognise as much. There is more that I could add to clarify various points which you might otherwise view as "special pleading and self exoneration", but with the aim of remaining on good terms with you and avoiding an extended, potentially hostile exchange, I won't.

I hope that we can at least end on an affirmation that the harm and suffering that humans cause to animals in factory farms is both callous and unnecessary, and should be ended.

Well, no you haven't, Laird, (and couldn't anyway IMO). There's a moral certainty in your approach to this whole subject which I don't think is justified. I get the impression (maybe wrongly) you may feel your view is reasonable and perfectly acceptable, but extremism of any kind rankles with me. Trouble always lies beyond it.

The last two lines, though I absolutely agree with. Anyway, you can have the last word and I won't say anything even if you tell me to pip off

Two from two. Go for the trifecta!

  Natural?

My view on veganism,  vegetarianism and other ism is that people can form whatever view they like. Discussion is always a good way to learn in  my experience if people are up for it. 

If I’m convinced I’m right and I think you need to change the way you do things to conform to my view, I have to try to persuade you. If I can’t then so be it. Much of the discussion around parapsychology and survival of physical death feels a bit like that to me.

It seems to me there seem to me many aspects of life where there are better ways to do things but humans can always find a rationale for not changing if we don’t really want to. 

Once I’ve seen something I’m doing as wrong and harmful, I usually change when the cognitive dissonance is impossible to ignore 

[Laird]

The last two lines, though I absolutely agree with

Excellent. Regardless of our other differences, this is an important agreement.

Anyway, you can have the last word

Thanks. Because this is an issue that I feel very (most) strongly about (and despite my concern that doing so might lead to hostilities), I take you up on that offer. I will try to be brief, and avoid unpleasantness. [This is a majorly revised version of my original post, which was quite wordy].

In brief: I encourage you to consider the possibility that your fundamental objections to veganism/fruitarianism are unreasonable, because, as I see them, the one is a non sequitur (as I pointed out in post #90 to this thread), and the other is a straw man (that the core principle of veganism is to eliminate ALL suffering, including that in the natural world).

Maybe I'm right?

Finally, regarding the idea that veganism is "extreme", I think "uncompromising" is a better fit. Just as we would not compromise on our view of assaults upon and killings of humans - they are unconditionally wrong - vegans take the same view with respect to the animals we exploit in our farming, entertainment, and research sectors. In any case, if it is an extremism, it is a peaceful extremism, and why would anybody object to the idea of an "extremely" peaceful world?

[Laird]

Natural?

He shoots.

He scores.

It's a hat trick!

He shoots.

He scores.

It's a hat trick!

Yay! Lol

Article in BBC business news section:

Making honey without bees and milk without cows

"As a vegan myself, I definitely miss consuming honey," says Darko Mandich, co-founder and chief executive of MeliBio, wistfully.

It's not unusual for vegans to miss certain foods. What is unusual, though, is Mr Mandich's solution: to create a type of honey, identical to the natural kind in every molecule, but produced without involving any bees at all.

Jordan Peterson and his daughter seem to have a rare metabolic disirder.  

Personally, I prefer an omnivore diet but vegsnism 
is viable for ppl without rare metabolic diorders like
his