120
Why isn't it considered vegan to harvest animals who die naturally? (lemmy.ca)
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
131 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Per the title. If an animal dies out in nature without any human involvement, shouldn't it be considered vegan to harvest any of the useful parts from it (not nessicarily meat, think hide), since there was no human-caused suffering involved?

Similarly, is driving a car not vegan because of the roadkill issue?

Especially curious to hear a perspective from any practicing moral vegans.

Also: I am not vegan. That's why I'm asking. I'm not planning on eating roadkill thank you. Just suggesting the existence of animal-based vegan leather.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 10 months ago

This is strawman reasoning. No vegan I've ever met belives that there's no moral distinction between human and non human animals. They believe that non human and have moral worth, and that moral worth is higher than 15 minutes of taste pleasure or shoes, etc.

The basic logic flows like this:

  • Non human animals are capable of subjective experiences, which includes the ability to suffer.
  • Exploitation of or killing of animals causes suffering.
  • It isn't essential, under normal circumstances in modern society, to cause that suffering for our survival.
  • It isn't morally permissible to cause unnecessary suffering.
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent