James Taranto has fun with vegan activists harassing animal agriculture students and calling people who eat meat, “carcass crunchers.” I am always amused that vegans act as if their diets don’t involve the slaughter of millions of animals.
I wrote about this once, and thought an encore would be worthwhile. From my NRO piece, “Veganism is Murder:”
Plant agriculture results each year in the mass slaughter of countless animals, including rabbits, gophers, mice, birds, snakes, and other field creatures. These animals are killed during harvesting, and in the various mechanized farming processes that produce wheat, corn, rice, soybeans, and other staples of vegan diets. And that doesn’t include the countless rats and mice poisoned in grain elevators, or the animals that die from loss of habitat cleared for agricultural use.
Animal-rights activists certainly don’t mention this inconvenient fact in their advocacy materials. But if the matter comes up in debate, they have a problem: They believe it is “speciesist” to grant some sentient animals – including humans – greater value than others; as PETA’s Ingrid Newkirk so famously put it, “a rat, is a fish, is a dog, is a boy.” Thus, they cannot contend that it is more wrong to kill a pig than a rabbit. Nor can they argue that field animals experience less-agonizing deaths from plant agriculture than food animals do from food-animal slaughtering. Field animals may flee in panic as the great rumbling harvest combines approach, only to be shredded to bits within their merciless blades; they may be burned to death when field leavings are burned; they may be poisoned by pesticides; they may die from predation when their plant cover has been removed.
No question: The animal-rights forces hold a weak intellectual hand.
No matter your diet, animals die that you might live. And they die more painful deaths than meat animals. Imagine being a mouse mowed to death by a combine or poisoned in a silo.
Vegans pretend that because they don’t intend to kill the animals, it doesn’t matter that animals are killed to support their diets of grain, fruit, etc.. But they know it will happen, which is little different. In human terms, reckless disregard to the likelihood of causing death can lead to murder charges.
Like I wrote before, animal rightists hold a weak intellectual hand. But then, their movement is almost pure emotionalism.