Sunday, March 29, 2015

Nutritious arguments

1319:

In any sort of discussion on animal-use we need to keep our cool because there are always two points of view, each opposite view valid to one person more than the other.  Before getting to matters of ethics and cruelty, we must deal with our own survival, so the issue of food must be dealt with.

Vegans who are dealing with matters of vegan nutrition are challenging a food tradition which is accepted as gospel: that animal foods are essential for health.  By promoting a vegan diet, we are making a case for the safety and healthiness of a plant-based diet.  At the same time we’re saying that meat and animal products are actually unhealthy.  This latter proposal doesn’t make sense to healthy young people, since they’ve been eating meat and dairy all their lives and they feel okay.  They’ll probably suggest we “Go tell it to our sixty year old friends, not us”.  Their fear of illness seems to them to be a lifetime away.

It’s easy for us to get bogged down in nutritional arguments and yet we do need to be sure we can address safety issues.  If we can speak confidently about food, we’ll show that best by inviting genuine questions, so that we can show that plant-based diets are safe and all nutritional needs may be met from plant food.  There are safeguards we need to mention in some detail, in order to answer all questions of safety.  But, food is used as a diversionary tactic, where it becomes easy for them to bog us down in nutritional argument.  It becomes a peg on which discussion hangs its hat – the talk is all about ‘diet’, anything to get away from the dark side, the cruelty of animal farming.


Our ‘return-point’ in any discussion is ‘ethics’.  This is where compassion is ignited and where we can win people over. 

No comments: