POLITICS: Re: Any difference between vegan activists & right-to-lifers?

[Guest guest]

Robin:

>Their message is, of course, this: Vegetarians love animals more

>than carnivores hence vegetarians are nicer, kinder, better people.

>Except for being a Republican party member, there is probably

>nothing worse around here than being called a carnivore. I wouldn't

>care so much except that it's starting to affect the already rather

>limited choices I have in foods when eating away from home.

Where is " around here " BTW? I'm thinking Oakland?

I think part of it is that politics these days is kind of like " football teams " .

People sign up for a team, and then root for it. It has very little

to do with FACTS.

>Around here, vegetarian activists are celebrated when they cause

>damage to small food businesses that harvest or prepare animals for

>food. These activists are protecting " defenseless animals " and I

>imagine that in some circles, right-to-life protesters who cause

>damage to abortion clinics might be celebrated in much the same way;

>After all, they are protecting the rights of unborn children. So the

>distinction I was trying to make was this: Are these completely

>different issues? If not, why not? Both are trying to dictate what

>others do based on personal moral values.. Aren't both reactionary

>in nature?

I tend to think you are correct. Both probably come from

the same root: protect the defenseless. But that part of us

that wants to " protect " is pretty mindless. I mean, look at

how you might feel when you see a rock star bite the head

off a poor defensless Barbie doll. Or worse, massacre a teddy

bear! (that happened on a show we watched and it devasted

my son: he doesn't mind car crashes etc. but one scene, where

a teddy bear got discarded (intact) broke his heart).

At some point the " rational " part of our brains is supposed

to balance the " feeling " part and say: look, a teddy bear is NOT

a baby! Even though it looks like one! But very few people seem

to be able to balance the two.

And the idea that you should allow others to make their

own mistakes ... that in itself is really radical. Not too long

ago the idea that guys should have their hair at whatever

length they wanted seemed amazing. Combine that with

the protection of the defenseless and it gets complicated.

My answer has always been .. *Science*. Carl Sagan.

Diamond. All those great Sci Fi writers. What Works.

What Can be Tested and Proved. Both the right-to-lifers

and the Vegans share this: they don't understand the

world as it exists. They want the World as it Should Be.

>Obviously, because of my regular yoga practice as well as the absurd

>cost of land around here, I'm not exactly among the old salt of the

>earth types in this county but it's a shame that healthy activities

>like yoga and meditation have to be so permeated with an anti-meat

>culture of grains and dairy. It comes up extremely often by young

>and old alike. All sorts of events are advertised as serving

>only " vegetarian food " . I was told once that is was so they were

>sure to attract the " right kind of people " .

Don't worry .. there will be a major backlash shortly. It's probably

already started, what with Whole Foods making sausage and all.

In this neck of the woods (also highly progressive) our local

farmer has a fridge full of raw milk and pastured eggs, and

ads for grass fed beef.

>I guess with yoga it's the historical connection to India but I

>suspect a slightly more sinister cause and that would be " food as a

>kind of vanity " . Here's the equation: " I am good (or at least better

>than you,) because I spare the flesh of living creatures. "

India is also HIGHLY overpopulated, which I suspect accounts

for a lot of the philosophy. They have this weird caste system

too, and in the country, a man can put his wife to death just

because (drowning in wells is common). It's weird, that in India they

have this great reverence for animals while the people get so

mistreated. Maybe by treating the animals nicely one can

avoid the fact one is mistreating whole groups of PEOPLE.

I read a great book about India, by an Indian, which made me

understand the whole country better. It's called " the Sorcerer's

Apprentice " .

Actually that jibes with the abortion thing too ... people

get all up in arms about, say, the morning after pill. The

same people have no problem with bombing whole sections

of a civilian population, or causing massive mental trauma

to a bunch of American GIs. Focusing on minutae (the pill)

saves one from thinking about the bigger issue (war).

(If we keep on with this we should move to nt-politics!).

>

Heidi Jean