In his Autobiography (c. 1750?), Ben Franklin states that, yes, he flirted with vegetarianism in his twenties. Self-immolation of this nature goes back aways… two factors sobered him.
First, humans have three kinds of teeth: Canines, incisors, and molars. Nature designed us to rip, tear, bite off great chunks and masticate them into pulp. It is literally unnatural to pretend otherwise. And since Nature knows no dietary constraints, preferring omnivorous nourishment, who are we to disagree?
Second, on his first transatlantic voyage back to Blighty, the one on which he noted the Gulf Stream, Franklin observed schools of flying fish hunted by “shoals” of predators. Well, said Ben, if they can eat each other, then I can eat them.
So much for vegetarians’ practical premises– as for moral ones, there aren’t any. As Churchill later wrote, “There are no passive virtues.” The fact that one is not a serial child molester does not render you thereby more “moral” than otherwise.
In fact, if you consider mere absence of anything a virtue, then lack of virtue becomes virtuous. Contradictory propositions such as “zero equals one” (nothing is something) can assert anything: Zero virtue equals Thomas Aquinas. Given that so-called Vegans assert contradicory propositions, they profess mere attitudes rather than informed opinions.
If you’re going to kill a pig, eat it rather than indulge a mindless butchery. Insisting on Veganism mindlessly butchers you, yourself.
