So I'm late in spotting this thread, but I figured I'd respond to clear up the many misconceptions I've seen here.
Let's start with the definition of veganism, taken directly from the Vegan Society, which invented the word:
So it is an entire way of life, not just a diet. Vegans not only avoid animal products in their food (meat, dairy, eggs, honey), but also avoid leather and any other products made from animals. Not the use of the phrase "as far as is possible and practicable". A lot of non-vegans like to play "gotcha" games to try and catch vegans using animal products, such as using medicine that was tested on animals, but there's no contradiction there. Veganism isn't about perfection. It's about doing the as much as possible to avoid current and future abuses of animals, but some things just can't be avoided.
There are people who adopt a vegan diet without the whole vegan lifestyle, usually for health or environmental reasons. That's called either "dietary vegan" or "strict vegetarian" (I never liked that latter term), not vegan. Yeah, I know it sounds like a "No True Vegan" argument, but it's just trying to clarify the language. Vegan = lifestyle, Dietary Vegan = diet. Got it?
Now for the actual "No True Vegan" argument, which is the subject of the original post in this thread. Veganism is supposed to be about avoiding cruelty to animals. Humans are animals. Most vegans will tell you that being nice to humans is a part of veganism. The people threatening the animal researchers in the original article are just bad vegans. There are extremists in any group. Don't let these assholes influence your opinion of the majority of vegans.
As for PeTA (I never understood their capitalization, but that's how it's "supposed to" be written), a lot of ethical vegetarians and vegans, including myself, agree with PeTA's stated goals, but don't like their methods. They're the biggest animal rights/vegan group in America, so they get the most press, but again, they don't represent a majority. Just a very vocal minority.
Let's start with the definition of veganism, taken directly from the Vegan Society, which invented the word:
Quote:Veganism is a way of living which seeks to exclude, as far as is possible and practicable, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose.
So it is an entire way of life, not just a diet. Vegans not only avoid animal products in their food (meat, dairy, eggs, honey), but also avoid leather and any other products made from animals. Not the use of the phrase "as far as is possible and practicable". A lot of non-vegans like to play "gotcha" games to try and catch vegans using animal products, such as using medicine that was tested on animals, but there's no contradiction there. Veganism isn't about perfection. It's about doing the as much as possible to avoid current and future abuses of animals, but some things just can't be avoided.
There are people who adopt a vegan diet without the whole vegan lifestyle, usually for health or environmental reasons. That's called either "dietary vegan" or "strict vegetarian" (I never liked that latter term), not vegan. Yeah, I know it sounds like a "No True Vegan" argument, but it's just trying to clarify the language. Vegan = lifestyle, Dietary Vegan = diet. Got it?
Now for the actual "No True Vegan" argument, which is the subject of the original post in this thread. Veganism is supposed to be about avoiding cruelty to animals. Humans are animals. Most vegans will tell you that being nice to humans is a part of veganism. The people threatening the animal researchers in the original article are just bad vegans. There are extremists in any group. Don't let these assholes influence your opinion of the majority of vegans.
As for PeTA (I never understood their capitalization, but that's how it's "supposed to" be written), a lot of ethical vegetarians and vegans, including myself, agree with PeTA's stated goals, but don't like their methods. They're the biggest animal rights/vegan group in America, so they get the most press, but again, they don't represent a majority. Just a very vocal minority.
That's MISTER Godless Vegetarian Tree Hugging Hippie Liberal to you.
