Is anyone interested in living in a self-sustained, growing food using sustainable vegan permaculture-methods, off-grid, ecological, non-speciesist vegan community?
Important principles: Justice, no exploitation and discrimination towards humans (i.e. no to sexism, racism, homophobia, ageism, etc.) and other animals (no to speciesism), uncompromisingly stand for these moral values and to educate the rest of the world in order to stop all injustices towards humans and nonhumans, nonviolence in words and deeds.
No breeding of animals, but all animals are very welcome and adopting animals from animal shelters is encouraged. Living as a community, but also interacting with and educating the population that is discriminating against human and nonhuman animals.
Why is this important?
-Showing the world how we can live sustainably and ecological in communities; and that we can live a lifestyle that doesn’t exploit humans and other animals.
-Vegan permaculture is important because of that common non-ecological or ecological agriculture isn’t usually vegan, it isn’t ecological and it is very, very destructive for the planet. Usually animal manure is used and methods are used to kill the insects. All monocultures are very destructive. They use huge amounts of fossil fuels and fossil fuels is a major contributor to environmental pollution and global warming. They deplete and destroy the soil and can and have many times lead to desertification. We should as a moral imperative go over to vegan permaculture, which is sustainable and healthy for the planet, and thus us humans and all nonhuman animals.
Transportations also involve lots of environmental pollution, burning of fossil fuels and greenhouse gases. By growing our own food locally we don’t need to contribute to this and can minimize our own ecological footprint. To see the destruction of greenhouse gases and pollution, I refer to the resources below.
I recommend this resources which touch on monocultures and other important environmental issues, etc.: http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2014/04/vegan-permaculture-vegan-ecological-and.html
Off-the-grid: “Off-the-grid homes are autonomous; they do not rely on municipal water supply, sewer, natural gas, electrical power grid, or similar utility services. A true off-grid house is able to operate completely independently of all traditional public utility services.”
This is important to minimize ones ecological footprint. More independence of the capitalistic political system. Why is capitalism a moral problem: http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2014/04/moral-problems-of-capitalism.html
Why nonviolence: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/on-violence/ ; Nonviolence in words: http://legacyofpythagoras.wordpress.com/2014/04/14/no-they-dont-deserve-it/
Why veganism: www.whyveganism.com
Why non-speciesist. Learn more here: http://www.vegankit.com/learn and http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/abolitionist-animal-rights-abolitionist-veganism-in-a-nutshell/
Why educating others/tips of how to educate others: http://www.abolitionistvegansociety.org/tavs-challenge/#.U0wiS1fzISM and http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2013/08/arguments-for-veganism-and-counter.html
Self-sustained: Grow all the food we need through vegan permaculture. No need to buy food in a food store. Sell the food and other ecological, home-made products on markets (and taking the opportunity just like every other opportunity and combining it with vegan advocacy) – in order to get the small amount of money one will live when living a sustainable, ecological, non-consumerist, minimalistic lifestyle. To a much larger extent we will decide over our own time, and we won’t have to go to work and work on someone else’s premises to earn money for them.
The community would likely consist of a big plot of land, big areas for growing vegetables, areas for animals, sustainably and ecologically built inexpensive houses,etc.
What do you all think? What are your practical ideas? Anyone who wants to live like this? I will likely do this in Europe. I would hope like communities like this will be built all over the world. I know that there are some quite self-sustained communities in Europe, but don’t know if there is some based on all these principles. Love to hear your comments and ideas!
I also created a group for this. Feel free to join: https://www.facebook.com/groups/688426811196469/
Please like and share to spread this post and to educate others about these important principles. Sharing is caring :) .. When no one comments or shares, very few people see the post.
I tagged some people in this post, since most people don't see it otherwise. Feel free to tell if you don't like being tagged and I will think of this next time. Thanks for reading! :)
-------More resources:
Veganic gardening: http://gentleworld.org/beginners-guide-to-veganic-gardening/
Facebook-post that I posted: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10202403572585264&set=a.10200507163856231.1073741828.1071775080&type=1
måndag 14 april 2014
Vegan permaculture, vegan, ecological and environment friendly
-Showing the
world how we can live sustainably and ecological in communities; and
that we can live a lifestyle that doesn’t exploit humans and other
animals.
-Vegan permaculture is important because of that common non-ecological or ecological agriculture in almost all cases involves animal use, isn’t ecological and is very, very destructive for the planet. Usually animal manure is used and methods are used to kill the insects. All monocultures are very destructive. They use huge amounts of fossil fuels and fossil fuels is a major contributor to environmental pollution and global warming. They deplete and destroy the soil and can and have many times lead to desertification. We should as a moral imperative go over to vegan permaculture, which is sustainable and healthy for the planet, and thus healthy for us humans and all nonhuman animals. Vegan permaculture doesn't require fossil fuels and enriches the soil instead of depleting it.
Transportations also involve lots of environmental pollution, burning of fossil fuels and greenhouse gases. By growing our own food locally we don’t need to contribute to this and can minimize our own ecological footprint. To see the destruction of greenhouse gases and pollution, I refer to the resources below.
-Vegan permaculture is important because of that common non-ecological or ecological agriculture in almost all cases involves animal use, isn’t ecological and is very, very destructive for the planet. Usually animal manure is used and methods are used to kill the insects. All monocultures are very destructive. They use huge amounts of fossil fuels and fossil fuels is a major contributor to environmental pollution and global warming. They deplete and destroy the soil and can and have many times lead to desertification. We should as a moral imperative go over to vegan permaculture, which is sustainable and healthy for the planet, and thus healthy for us humans and all nonhuman animals. Vegan permaculture doesn't require fossil fuels and enriches the soil instead of depleting it.
Transportations also involve lots of environmental pollution, burning of fossil fuels and greenhouse gases. By growing our own food locally we don’t need to contribute to this and can minimize our own ecological footprint. To see the destruction of greenhouse gases and pollution, I refer to the resources below.
Richard
Oppenlander: Sustainability and Food Choice
The Home: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqxENMKaeCU
Dirt the Movie: http://www.thedirtmovie.org/
Dirt the Movie: http://www.thedirtmovie.org/
Planet in Peril: http://edition.cnn.com/services/opk/planet.peril/for.html
Flow: How did a handful of corporations steal our water:
http://crmpublication.blogspot.no/2010/02/documentary-flow-how-did-handful-of.html
State of the Planet – The Complete Series .. David Attenborough
Flow: How did a handful of corporations steal our water:
http://crmpublication.blogspot.no/2010/02/documentary-flow-how-did-handful-of.html
State of the Planet – The Complete Series .. David Attenborough
Moral problems of capitalism
quote by Linda McKenzie replying to a person who wrote <<We need more Buffetts and fewer Gates.>>:
"Or better yet, a society that does away with obscene profits based on exploitation for anyone. As much as we might admire Warren Buffet's philanthropy, no-one can make the kind of money he made without exploitation. So as Peter Buffet very accurately puts it, it's largely an exercise in "conscience laundering" to try to partially undo with the left hand what has been created with the right hand, while leaving the fundamental causes of the need for charity intact. Peter Buffet has been admirably honest, especially in indicting himself as the co-chair of a charitable trust, in speaking the truth about this, but, as is to be expected, stops short of indicting capitalism. “I’m really not calling for an end to capitalism; I’m calling for humanism.” Capitalism is incompatible with humanism. What Peter Buffet fails to acknowledge is that the growth of social inequality and all its attendant social ills is the inevitable outcome of the capitalist system. No social problem--from war, to poverty, to attacks on democratic rights--can be addressed without breaking the grip of the corporate and financial plutocracy over society. The notion of "humane" capitalism is as much a fantasy as "humane" animal exploitation. Buffet says, “It’s time for a new operating system. Not a 2.0 or a 3.0, but something built from the ground up. New code.” He's absolutely right, and that system is not some different version of capitalism.
Nevertheless, the article by Peter Buffet is excellent, and I agree that everyone should read it. Charity is never a substitute for justice. Corporate charity is a "remedy which is part of the disease", to quote philosopher, Slavoj Zizek. He has said that it allows us to buy our redemption as consumers in the very act of consuming. Or translated into the modus operandi of the animal welfarist charities, allows us to buy our redemption from exploitation in the very act of exploiting, supposedly "humanely". Gary L. Francione: The Abolitionist Approach to Animal Rights has talked about "happy" exploitation and donations to welfarist corporations using the analogy of the religious practice of buying indulgences to absolve ourselves from our immorality in using animals: "They continue to suffer horribly irrespective of what ‘happy’ label is slapped on their corpses or the products we make from them. Having Singer and other animal advocates claim that it is morally acceptable to consume ‘happy’ meat or eggs or dairy is the modern day equivalent of selling indulgences" (What Michael Vick Taught Us).
This animation http://
--------
Some expressions of capitalism:
http://www.siliconafrica.com/africans-live-on-a-continent-onwed-by-europeans/
Cocoa slavery: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Vfbv6hNeng
See second and third paragraph: "I wish that this year will be a year where everyone decides to not be a part of any discrimination and violence. That we stand up against all discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, color, age, species, etc! [more info: note 0] <3
I wish that we decide to use our time to fight against and alleviate the poverty, starvation, violence and discrimination in this world; that we help the orphans of this world, support foster homes, and consider to adopt people, and animals from animal shelters if we have the opportunity. A year were we don’t support the slavery and injustices of the cocoa industry [see note 1], and other slave work that is so common in the production of commodities in the Third world.
A year where we don’t exacerbate the poverty, starvation, injustices, environmental destruction involved in/exacerbated by the production and consumption of animal foods, which involves breeding up, using, unnecessarily harming and killing animals for food; and giving them feed that could have been used to feed starving people; while taking their land, driving them out of their homes and growing feed and raising “cattle” on land that could have been used to feed the indigenous population [2]. The feed that feeds the animals only in USA could be used to feed 800 million people. At the same time several million people die of starvation and 870 million suffering from chronic undernourishment [4]. And we have no nutritional need for this (see below)."
http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2013/12/happy-new-vegan-year-free-of-violence.html
---
All monocultures are unethical (big scale farming of one crop to maximize the profit regardless of the environmental cost). We should as a moral imperative go over to vegan permaculture, which is sustainable and healthy for the planet.
Furthermore I recommend this resources which touch on monocultures and other important environmental issues, etc. I don't agree with all the contents of all the movies.:
How violence and domestication of animals, leads to violence against humans:
Animal Oppression and Human Violence, by David A. Nibert, Professor of Sociology at Wittenberg University.
http://www.cupblog.org/?p=10179
The Home: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqxENMKaeCU
Dirt the Movie: http://www.thedirtmovie.org/
Planet in Peril: http://edition.cnn.com/services/opk/planet.peril/for.html
Flow: How did a handful of corporations steal our water:
http://crmpublication.blogspot.no/2010/02/documentary-flow-how-did-handful-of.html
State of the Planet – The Complete Series .. David Attenborough
------
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/without-prejudice/201305/exploitation-is-exploitation-period
--
--
Pauline: "Very good article by Gordon Hodson (as was his one about eating animals): "Despite having a tremendous capacity for love, affection, and empathy, we can also deactivate our empathy quite easily, particularly when the “others” affected are not members of our groups (de Waal, 2009)". Quite.
---
Kris Nelson Yes, the ingroup vs. outgroup of relative degrees of identification are what allow the disconnected and separation predatory mind-virus to inhabit us.
--
"Or better yet, a society that does away with obscene profits based on exploitation for anyone. As much as we might admire Warren Buffet's philanthropy, no-one can make the kind of money he made without exploitation. So as Peter Buffet very accurately puts it, it's largely an exercise in "conscience laundering" to try to partially undo with the left hand what has been created with the right hand, while leaving the fundamental causes of the need for charity intact. Peter Buffet has been admirably honest, especially in indicting himself as the co-chair of a charitable trust, in speaking the truth about this, but, as is to be expected, stops short of indicting capitalism. “I’m really not calling for an end to capitalism; I’m calling for humanism.” Capitalism is incompatible with humanism. What Peter Buffet fails to acknowledge is that the growth of social inequality and all its attendant social ills is the inevitable outcome of the capitalist system. No social problem--from war, to poverty, to attacks on democratic rights--can be addressed without breaking the grip of the corporate and financial plutocracy over society. The notion of "humane" capitalism is as much a fantasy as "humane" animal exploitation. Buffet says, “It’s time for a new operating system. Not a 2.0 or a 3.0, but something built from the ground up. New code.” He's absolutely right, and that system is not some different version of capitalism.
Nevertheless, the article by Peter Buffet is excellent, and I agree that everyone should read it. Charity is never a substitute for justice. Corporate charity is a "remedy which is part of the disease", to quote philosopher, Slavoj Zizek. He has said that it allows us to buy our redemption as consumers in the very act of consuming. Or translated into the modus operandi of the animal welfarist charities, allows us to buy our redemption from exploitation in the very act of exploiting, supposedly "humanely". Gary L. Francione: The Abolitionist Approach to Animal Rights has talked about "happy" exploitation and donations to welfarist corporations using the analogy of the religious practice of buying indulgences to absolve ourselves from our immorality in using animals: "They continue to suffer horribly irrespective of what ‘happy’ label is slapped on their corpses or the products we make from them. Having Singer and other animal advocates claim that it is morally acceptable to consume ‘happy’ meat or eggs or dairy is the modern day equivalent of selling indulgences" (What Michael Vick Taught Us).
This animation http://
--------
Some expressions of capitalism:
http://www.siliconafrica.com/africans-live-on-a-continent-onwed-by-europeans/
Cocoa slavery: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Vfbv6hNeng
See second and third paragraph: "I wish that this year will be a year where everyone decides to not be a part of any discrimination and violence. That we stand up against all discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, color, age, species, etc! [more info: note 0] <3
I wish that we decide to use our time to fight against and alleviate the poverty, starvation, violence and discrimination in this world; that we help the orphans of this world, support foster homes, and consider to adopt people, and animals from animal shelters if we have the opportunity. A year were we don’t support the slavery and injustices of the cocoa industry [see note 1], and other slave work that is so common in the production of commodities in the Third world.
A year where we don’t exacerbate the poverty, starvation, injustices, environmental destruction involved in/exacerbated by the production and consumption of animal foods, which involves breeding up, using, unnecessarily harming and killing animals for food; and giving them feed that could have been used to feed starving people; while taking their land, driving them out of their homes and growing feed and raising “cattle” on land that could have been used to feed the indigenous population [2]. The feed that feeds the animals only in USA could be used to feed 800 million people. At the same time several million people die of starvation and 870 million suffering from chronic undernourishment [4]. And we have no nutritional need for this (see below)."
http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2013/12/happy-new-vegan-year-free-of-violence.html
All monocultures are unethical (big scale farming of one crop to maximize the profit regardless of the environmental cost). We should as a moral imperative go over to vegan permaculture, which is sustainable and healthy for the planet.
Furthermore I recommend this resources which touch on monocultures and other important environmental issues, etc. I don't agree with all the contents of all the movies.:
How violence and domestication of animals, leads to violence against humans:
Animal Oppression and Human Violence, by David A. Nibert, Professor of Sociology at Wittenberg University.
http://www.cupblog.org/?p=10179
The Home: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqxENMKaeCU
Dirt the Movie: http://www.thedirtmovie.org/
Planet in Peril: http://edition.cnn.com/services/opk/planet.peril/for.html
Flow: How did a handful of corporations steal our water:
http://crmpublication.blogspot.no/2010/02/documentary-flow-how-did-handful-of.html
State of the Planet – The Complete Series .. David Attenborough
------
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/without-prejudice/201305/exploitation-is-exploitation-period
--
--
Pauline: "Very good article by Gordon Hodson (as was his one about eating animals): "Despite having a tremendous capacity for love, affection, and empathy, we can also deactivate our empathy quite easily, particularly when the “others” affected are not members of our groups (de Waal, 2009)". Quite.
---
Kris Nelson Yes, the ingroup vs. outgroup of relative degrees of identification are what allow the disconnected and separation predatory mind-virus to inhabit us.
--
Cause of the injustices in Bangladesh, e.g. in garment factories, and the solution to end poverty and starvation
-------
"The goals of corporate capitalism are
increasingly indistinguishable from the goals of the state. The political and
economic systems are subservient to corporate profit. Debate between conventional
liberals and conservatives has been replaced by empty political theater and
spectacle. Corporations, no matter which politicians are in office, loot the
Treasury, escape taxation, push down wages, break unions, dismantle civil
society, gut regulation and legal oversight, control information, prosecute
endless war and dismantle public institutions and programs that include
schools, welfare and Social Security. And elected officials, enriched through
our form of legalized corporate bribery, have no intention of halting the
process".
Motargument och fel i Lierre Kieth - Vegomyten
Hon har rätt i att konventionellt jordbruk är väldigt destruktivt. Men hon känner antingen inte till eller ignorerar vegansk permakultur.
Hon har fel i att en vegansk diet är skadligt för kroppen: http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2013/08/humans-can-live-and-thrive-on-healthy.html
Jag skrev detta svar i en tråd där bl.a. hennes bok diskuterades:
Alla monokulturer (vilket är i princip hur all mat odlas) är f.ö. väldigt miljöförstörande, och det enda ekologiskt hållbara sättet att odla mat på är småskaligt genom att använda sig av vegansk permakultur. Så i ett miljöetiskt perspektiv så ska man odla så mycket mat man har möjlighet till genom vegansk permakultur, och/eller köpa mat som är odlad på detta sätt [1].
Det finns f.ö. miljöproblem även med att föda upp och äta 'betesdjur': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drS5hHdelR8
Men när man diskuterar detta glöms ofta djuren bort. Djuren är en del av miljön. Och de har också ett egenvärde. Är det rätt att ta deras liv när vi kan leva och må bra på en vegansk diet? Se bifogad bild för mer info.
1. Se referenser för påståenden här: http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2014/03/hur-norge-sveriges-och-hela.html
Hon har fel i att en vegansk diet är skadligt för kroppen: http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2013/08/humans-can-live-and-thrive-on-healthy.html
Jag skrev detta svar i en tråd där bl.a. hennes bok diskuterades:
Alla monokulturer (vilket är i princip hur all mat odlas) är f.ö. väldigt miljöförstörande, och det enda ekologiskt hållbara sättet att odla mat på är småskaligt genom att använda sig av vegansk permakultur. Så i ett miljöetiskt perspektiv så ska man odla så mycket mat man har möjlighet till genom vegansk permakultur, och/eller köpa mat som är odlad på detta sätt [1].
Det finns f.ö. miljöproblem även med att föda upp och äta 'betesdjur': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drS5hHdelR8
Men när man diskuterar detta glöms ofta djuren bort. Djuren är en del av miljön. Och de har också ett egenvärde. Är det rätt att ta deras liv när vi kan leva och må bra på en vegansk diet? Se bifogad bild för mer info.
1. Se referenser för påståenden här: http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2014/03/hur-norge-sveriges-och-hela.html
Varför veganer inte äter fisk och skaldjur
Fiskarnas
och skaldjurens förmåga att lida skiljer sig inte ifrån däggdjurens
förmåga att lida. Fiskarnas och skaldjurens intresse av att leva och
inte bli dödade av oss skiljer sig inte från däggdjurens intresse av att
leva.
Vi kan relatera mer till däggdjur, men det innebär inte att de har ett större moraliskt värde. Det är ett grundlöst antagande att tro att vi kan mäta andras moraliska värde utefter hur lika de är oss eller hur intelligenta de är. Och att intelligens mäts utefter våra premisser. Men oavsett om man tror att andra djur är mer eller mindre värda: Om man anser att det är fel att utsätta djur för onödigt lidande och vill leva efter denna moraliska princip, så är det inkonsekvent att konsumera animaliska livsmedel, inklusive fisk, mejeriprodukter, ägg, kött, honung; och att använda läder, dun, päls, etc.
Om man menar att det är fel att utsätta försvarslösa, kännande och utsatta individer för onödigt våld och att utöva sin makt, bör man sluta upp med det genom att bli vegan.
Mer information på denna länk om bl.a. speciesism: http://vegankit.com/learn
Ja, det finns andra djur som våldtar andra djur. Det finns andra människor som våldtar andra människor. På vilket sätt är detta moraliskt relevant? Det finns djur som dödar andra djur, oftast p.g.a. de behöver det för sin överlevnad. Och det finns människor som dödar djur och som en ytterligare konsekvens av detta förstör deras familjer, trots att de skulle kunna konsumera en vegansk diet. Hur är andras beteende relevant när vi bestämmer vad som är moraliskt rätt eller inte? Om man anser att det är etiskt fel att skada andra och ta deras mest grundläggande intressen ifrån dem, så bör man också leva efter det och bli vegan.
Vi kan relatera mer till däggdjur, men det innebär inte att de har ett större moraliskt värde. Det är ett grundlöst antagande att tro att vi kan mäta andras moraliska värde utefter hur lika de är oss eller hur intelligenta de är. Och att intelligens mäts utefter våra premisser. Men oavsett om man tror att andra djur är mer eller mindre värda: Om man anser att det är fel att utsätta djur för onödigt lidande och vill leva efter denna moraliska princip, så är det inkonsekvent att konsumera animaliska livsmedel, inklusive fisk, mejeriprodukter, ägg, kött, honung; och att använda läder, dun, päls, etc.
Om man menar att det är fel att utsätta försvarslösa, kännande och utsatta individer för onödigt våld och att utöva sin makt, bör man sluta upp med det genom att bli vegan.
Mer information på denna länk om bl.a. speciesism: http://vegankit.com/learn
Ja, det finns andra djur som våldtar andra djur. Det finns andra människor som våldtar andra människor. På vilket sätt är detta moraliskt relevant? Det finns djur som dödar andra djur, oftast p.g.a. de behöver det för sin överlevnad. Och det finns människor som dödar djur och som en ytterligare konsekvens av detta förstör deras familjer, trots att de skulle kunna konsumera en vegansk diet. Hur är andras beteende relevant när vi bestämmer vad som är moraliskt rätt eller inte? Om man anser att det är etiskt fel att skada andra och ta deras mest grundläggande intressen ifrån dem, så bör man också leva efter det och bli vegan.
Veganskt svar på frågan: Är det rätt att döda myggor som bär malaria?
Vi människor skiljer oftast en handling som är gjord utav självförsvar/nödvändighet för vår överlevnad och en handling som görs trots att det inte finns någon nödvändighet. Ett exempel på handlingar som görs av nödvändighet vore om du bodde i jungeln och blev attackerad av ett lejon. Ett exempel som inte görs av nödvändighet är om du arrangerar hundkamper, tjurfäktning, jagar för nöje, jagar för mat trots att du har tillgång till vegetabiliska livsmedel, etcetera.
Min poäng är som sagt: Oavsett om man anser att djur är mindre moraliskt värda eller inte, så har vi ingen rätt att utsätta dem för onödigt lidande. Människor är eniga med denna princip och det är därför man är emot hundkamper, tjurfäktning och att människor negligerar sina husdjur utav bekvämlighet. Men om vi ska leva konsekvent efter denna princip måste vi också inkludera t.ex. jakt av vilda djur, uppfödning av djur, fiske, etc. Fiskar är kännande varelser med ett intresse av att leva, som lider oerhört av att få en krok i munnen. Forskare har kommit fram till detta genom plågsamma djurförsök.
När det gäller malariamygg så verkar det finnas lösningar som inte dödar myggen, men ändå håller dem borta. Se t.ex. denna bloggpost: http://delhivegans.blogspot.no/2013/10/simple-eco-friendly-steps-to-prevent.html
Således så är det fullständigt onödigt att döda dem. Det finns f.ö. inget "effektivt" sätt heller att göra det på, och ofta så görs detta med ickeekologiska miljöförstörande kemikalier, vilket drabbar både människor och djur. Och att döda en massor av djur rubbar alltid det ekologiska kretsloppet. Så det är inte endast negativt för de drabbade djuren, utan även för de andra djuren som lever där, inklusive människan. Jag vet inte om myggor är förnimmande varelser som kan känna smärta, men jag ger dem 'the benefit of doubt'.
söndag 13 april 2014
Svar på:"Jag är emot köttkonsumtion/för djurens rättigheter och äter kött"
Det skiljer sig inte från någon som påstår sig vara för att slaveriet ska avskaffas, men som fortsätter att äga slavar.
"Many animal advocates claim to favor animal rights but continue to eat animal products. Indeed, many “leaders” of the animal movement are not vegans. That is no different from someone who claims to be in favor of the abolition of slavery but who continues to own slaves."
Citat från: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/veganism-the-fundamental-principle-of-the-abolitionist-movement/#.U0qfK_l_sWU
"Many animal advocates claim to favor animal rights but continue to eat animal products. Indeed, many “leaders” of the animal movement are not vegans. That is no different from someone who claims to be in favor of the abolition of slavery but who continues to own slaves."
Citat från: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/veganism-the-fundamental-principle-of-the-abolitionist-movement/#.U0qfK_l_sWU
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)