This is threaded into the wrong place in the discussion because my POP3 email server is currently down (but I've still got SMTP). I'm such an addict I went to the archives to see what was being said...
Pen said: > Since her main argument for having gone vegetarian in the first place > was a belief that humans are meant to be herbivorous, and that eating > meat goes against nature. > [ .... ] > hypocritical also means applying opposite standards to oneself. She > feels humans are natural herbivores, but theres no doubt that cats are > primarily carnivores. Therefore, making a cat an herbivore is, by her > own logic, unnatural. OK, well, I am a bit relieved. I usually don't find myself totally at odds with your opinions, and this one surprised me, until I read the above clarification. As it happens I would disagree strongly with any claim that humans are "natural vegetarians" or are "meant to be vegetarian"; in fact I would claim the former phrase is false and the latter phrase is entirely meaningless. I think a study of our teeth lasting more than a minute or two would be enough to convince pretty much anyone with an open mind that we co-evolved with our *culture*, and what we're best suited to is a balanced omnivorous diet consisting to a large extent of *COOKED* food. (OTOH, our inability to make our own vitamin C seems like a fairly strong indication that fresh fruit probably made up a big fraction of our ancestors' diets.) One may, on the other hand, decide to "go vege" for a lot of reasons which have nothing to do with muddle-headed thoughts about what people "are meant" to do. And as for cats ... well, I think the "raw diet" people win the "It's natural!" argument hands down but I still think dropping a live mouse or two in the blender for the cat's evening meal is seriously over the top. I would not do that, no way; I like mice (yes, I know they gave our ancestors fits and are the bane of farmers to this day, and when I was a landlord and had mice I put out snap-traps because it was necessary to get rid of the mice post-haste; but I still like them and if I have a choice I will let them live their lives in peace). Resource efficiency is one *big* reason for avoiding animal products. The fact that I find all furry four-footed beasts appealing is another reason not to eat them (though I also feel the larger ones should be appealing at a safe distance, thank you). This is the "I don't want to eat them because I think it's icky" argument. You may not buy it, but that doesn't make it hypocritical. As to the consistency of killing small furry animals whom we've decided not to keep around the house to feed to small furry animals whom we've decided to keep as companions, well, that seems kind of inconsistent, doesn't it? At least it does if we claim we "love animals". Oh, yeah? Well, *which* animals? Anyhow if there's an alternative it seems worth checking out. Cats who were owned by "early adopters" of vegan cat foods had terrible things happen to them, because they were not sufficiently supplemented with taurine and some other things. These days it *appears* that the bugs have been worked out of the commercial vegan cat foods. Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > leaking pen wrote: >> Ohh, god, I had a friend who did that. I spent thirty minutes >> lambasting her for her total and complete hypocrisy. >
