RAW-FOOD Archives

Raw Food Diet Support List

RAW-FOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jean-Louis Tu <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 14 Aug 1997 13:48:36 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (52 lines)
 Tom:
> A good question. The "food offered with love" has a number of aspects:
> 1) It is a description of milk and dairy, as Mother cow makes milk for her
> calf: she loves her calf, and the milk is an expression of her love for
> her calf.  (Some won't agree, but this is right in line with vegan "values".)
> Further, the cow is generous and will share her milk with us.

I got your point (that we don't harm the cow because she doesn't resist,
and produces an excess of milk). But I am not sure the cow is really
generous, in the sense that she really wants to give food to you.
Maybe she doesn't care at all. Or, if she wants to be milked, it is
likely that she does because she just wants to get rid of the excess
of milk, and not because she wants to feed you.

And finally, the cow produces an excess of milk because of artificial
selection: wild animals don't produce more than necessary than for their
offspring. So, we, humans, have artificially created animals that
became dependent on us, i.e. we have, over the centuries, created
a chain that binds some animals to us.

Another remark that I would like to add: some vegans have pets, which I
don't understand. Their pet is as much "enslaved" as a milking cow
[or, if you prefer, a cow is not more "enslaved" than their pet]

> 2) From this view, animal flesh is not offered in love, as the animal
> wants to survive - i.e., avoid being eaten. Animals don't offer their flesh
> to us.

Agreed. But that comes back to the argument "not willing to cause
unnecessary suffering".

> One argument relies on the law of karma: if you eat a creature, then karma
> requires that you be eaten in the future. (Blood for blood.)

The question would be: is it better to be a lion or a gazelle?
Is it better to be eaten or to die of cancer or because of tooth wear?

> Plants
> have less consciousness; when you eat them, their "body-identification"
> consciousness is not as strong. Hence, as your goal is to overcome this
> body-identification, a diet of plants is better, as it hinders you less
> from your goal.

What do you think about eating eggs? Eggs don't have more consciousness
than plants.

Best wishes,

Jean-Louis
[log in to unmask]


ATOM RSS1 RSS2