Boycott Veganism

No, I am not a turncoat. What do you people take me for?

Actually, I just found this wonderful little paper on why it is reasonable for a person concerned about the rights of animals to reject veganism. Yes, they actually argue that it would be better for the animals if all us animal activists just said “Fuck it, I am going to go eat a steak”. Well, at least I think that is what they are saying.

I think that, whenever I am bored, I am going to post rebuttals to the arguments here, since some seem to me to reflect some pretty common misunderstandings about ethical veganism and animal rights generally. Others, however, just seem to reflect misunderstandings about what it is for something to be an argument. These points are kind of funny, but really not worth anyone’s time. For example, read “argument” number two. And to think, this person is writing a book!

Also, this article gives us some fodder for the contributors who don’t know what to contribute. Just pick one of the arguments and knock it down.

But, for what its worth, I don’t think anyone will be able to top Seitan’s comments on the Vegan Freaks board.

“what the fuck are you talking about? if im reading (and understanding) this correct, its very insulting, not to me, but to the animals that are getting their fuckin faces kicked in because people are such weak fuckups, to abstain from something that is totally un-necessary in the first place.

fuck me, are you taking the piss?
somebody please tell me im reading this wrong, please…..”

First Reading: Francione on Michael Vick

I suppose now is as good a time as any to experiment with the new blog format. Below is a little article Gary Francione wrote about the charges brought against Michael Vick for organizing dog fights.

Hopefully, this post gets as much reaction as Francione’s original post did, and can foster some lively discussion. Please post any thoughts, questions, criticisms etc. in the comments section.

A Note about Michael Vick

http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/2007/08/02/a-note-about-michael-vick/

“There has been an enormous amount of coverage of the alleged dog fighting operation sponsored by Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick. Vick and three other men were indicted on federal felony charges claiming that Vick had sponsored illegal dog fighting, gambled on dog fights and permitted acts of cruelty against animals on his property. The talk shows are filled with talking heads from the “humane community” condemning dog fighting and calling for Vick to be punished if he is, indeed, guilty. Nike and Reebok have suspended products endorsed by Vick.

Please let me be very clear: I think that dog fighting is a terrible thing.

But I must say that the Vick case is rather dramatically demonstrating what I call our “moral schizophrenia” about animals. That is, if one thing is clear, it is that we do not think clearly about our moral obligations to animals.

In this country alone, we kill over ten billion land animals annually for food. The animals we eat—even those supposedly raised “humanely”—suffer as much as the dogs that are used in dog fighting. There is no “need” for us to eat meat, dairy, or eggs. Indeed, these foods are increasingly linked to various human diseases and animal agriculture is an environmental disaster for the planet. We impose pain, suffering, and death on these billions of sentient nonhumans because we enjoy eating their flesh and the products that we make from them.

There is something positively bizarre about condemning Michael Vick for using dogs in a hideous form of entertainment when 99% of us also use animals that are every bit as sentient as dogs in another hideous form of entertainment that is no more justifiable than fighting dogs: eating animals and animal products.

Past Readings

The following is a list of past readings that was up on the old site. Feel free to browse, but we should be having new readings coming up soon. If anyone has any questions about anything specific, please post them in the comments section and we will try and answer them shortly.

READINGS:

Not all of the following readings are ideologically supported by VARI, but rather, they provide interesting philosophical insights. So, that said, if you are looking for readings which are, in VARIs view, very important and reflect our philosophical underpinnings, read the books asterisked at the bottom of this page.

2006

WEEK 1: October 19^th, 2006
INTRODUCTION TO NONHUMAN ANIMAL ETHICS
Singer, Peter. All Animals Are Equal.

WEEK 2: October 26^th, 2006
ANIMAL LIBERATION OR ANIMAL RIGHTS?
Regan, Tom. The Case for Animal Rights.

WEEK 3: November 2^nd, 2006
ANIMAL RIGHTS FRANCIONE STYLE
Francione, Gary. A Brief Intro To AR: Your Child or the Dog?

WEEK 4: November 9^th, 2006
AN INTRODUCTION TO ANIMAL WELFARE VS. ANIMAL RIGHTS
Singer, Peter. The Longest Journey Begins with a Single Step: Promoting Animal Rights by Promoting Reform.

Francione, Gary. Abolition of Animal Exploitation: The Journey Will Not Begin While We Are Walking Backwards.

WEEK 5: November 16^th, 2006
ANIMALS AS PROPERTY
Francione, Gary. Personhood, Property and Legal Competence, Section 1: Legal Rights for Great Apes and Section 2: Animals as Property

ALSO, IF YOU’RE INTERESTED

Criminal Code of Canada, Part XI: Wilful and Forbidden Acts in Respect of Certain Property, Sections 444, 445, 446 and 447 Cattle and Other Animals and Cruelty to Animals

WEEK 6: November 23^rd, 2006
LAST MEETING OF 2006, NO READINGS.

2007

WEEK 1: January 17^th, 2007
FIRST MEETING OF 2007, NO READINGS