Any Vegetarians/Vegans here?

[bennyboy]

Now I know you can't help being a hair-splitting, obfuscating, red herring filled furrball, but I think when you question the relationship between the use of the term 'ethics' versus 'moral', you've ceased to be worth even the courtesy of a reply.

Think whatever you want. These words are sometimes used interchangeably, and sometimes with distinction. Since I don't know which way you are looking at the words, it is necessary to ask you to clarify. Your outrage at the process of clarifying meaning is, however, noted.

---

And antibiotics involve harming living beings. It all depends where you draw your line. You, apparently, set your standard of significance at the ability to suffer. I draw mine at the ability to reason. Others, who take a more extreme view, may draw it at life.

What makes your criteria better than anyone else's (in either direction).

It's a fair enough point. A lot of energy goes into the growing of a plant, and billions of years of evolution. Why shouldn't it be protected and valued as a living thing?

If the goal is to have no effect on any living organism, then the answer is pretty obvious: protecting all organisms, including plants, demands suicide.

Barring that, there's no scenario in which eating meat will have a net reduction on the harm that sustaining a human being causes to other organisms. All meat is derived from the consumption of plants. Therefore, meat consumption STILL involves the consumption of the plants, and ALSO involves the additional suffering of the food animal.