a note on high horses and the vegan delusion

"I know that all revolutions must have ideologies that spur them. That in the heat of conflict those ideologies tend to be smelted into rigid dogmas claiming exclusive possession of the truth, and the keys to paradise, is tragic." --Saul D. Alinsky, Rules for Radicals

Although we often get lumped together, vegans can be very different from one another. Some of us are militant, some low-key, some freegan, some eco-conscious, some animal focused...the list goes on. I dedicate this post to the high horse vegan (HHV).

In short, a HHV is self-righteous, or "smugly moralistic and intolerant of the opinions and behavior of others." Now, there is a fine line between developing a personal set of ethics, opinions, and disagreements...and being self-righteous. Perhaps it is even an art.

My most recent [virtual] encounter with a HHV took place yesterday. Potentially developing asthma, I am currently on a steroid inhaler to counter my lung inflammation. I've been a vegan for 2.5 years, and in the doctor's office struggling for a deep breath of air, I didn't think to talk ingredients. A couple of hours and a lot of money later, I purchased and used an Advair inhaler--which, after reading the directions, turns out to contain lactose.

Bummed I didn't inquire when chatting with the doc, I get online to google vegan asthma medication. I stumbled upon an online forum where an asthmatic vegan articulated concerns similar to mine. One of the responses came from a stereotypical HHV:

"Even if it does not contain animal products, it was definitely tested on animals. Just wheeze."

Hell to the no. First, animal testing on an approved drug already on the market is a sunk cost. Second, this commentator is living what I call the "vegan delusion." The vegan delusion is the idea that, by being a strict vegan, you do not harm animals. This is wrong. Being a vegan means reducing harm to animals where possible--not reducing all harm (which is impossible).

Why? Because simply existing necessary displaces and inevitably harms animals. Your home, your city, your beloved co-op, your yoga studio are currently situated in former ecosystems. That sustainable local farmer you love so dearly? S/he displaces animal populations by planting fields of veggies. Tractors invariably run over and kill some field animals. The list goes on.

For any human being to exist in a modern setting, some amount of animals will be displaced and/or die. As a vegan, the most you can do is reduce that number where humanly possible and where it is efficient to do so. Take my inhaler for example. Seeing as I mistakenly purchased an animal product, from an environmental/efficiency perspective, I am not going to throw away a perfectly usable inhaler. Under this same rationale, I grandfathered in my old leather products when I stopped purchasing new ones (and I am likewise comfortable with recycled leather).

If there is no lactose-free inhaler alternative, I will continue to purchase inhalers as needed. Again, as being a vegan necessarily means mitigating harm to animals where possible (as opposed to eliminating harm all together), in the matter of breathing, this is one corner I cannot reasonably cut.

Is it speciesism to value my life more than the cow tortured for its lactose? One can make that argument. However, it is not only humans that necessarily occupy space and displace others--it is all living things. Call it natural selection, call it the circle of life--whatever you'd like. I am comfortable existing and occupying space, so long as I eliminate harm where I reasonably can.

If you do avoid anything containing any trace of animal and anything ever tested on animals, that is honestly very wonderful. However, the truth is that the vegan delusion of zero harm is and will always be just that--a delusion.

living v dying

For whatever reason, I have been thinking a lot lately about what or who I would be willing to die for. A few nights ago, I went to an open mic night at a Coffee Bean in Encino (called Soap Box Sessions) and a performer completely flipped my framing: what would I be willing to live for? I decided that was a much more meaningful and interesting side of the coin.

ending unanimity for execution

After a jury failed to unanimously agree to execute Brian G. Nichols for the rash murder of 4 government employees:

Georgia legislators have began lining up to introduce bills eliminating the requirement that juries be unanimous for a death sentence. Hard-on-crime lawmakers have long favored easier rules on death sentencing, but the Nichols sentence has given new urgency to their cause. full article

Representative Barry A. Fleming believes the law should be weakened because “Unfortunately, you have people who say they’re willing to consider the death penalty, but when they get on a jury, it becomes clear that they’re actually death penalty opponents.”

Uhhh...you mean once citizens become personally involved in the process, they tend to realize that execution is cruel and unusual punishment? That Americans retract support of the death penalty on the spot lends credence to eliminating the punishment--not making it easier to execute (no pun intended).

Montana judge OKs assisted suicide

perhaps some progress:

A Montana judge has ruled that doctor-assisted suicides are legal in the state, a decision likely to be appealed as the state argues that the Legislature, not the court, should decide whether terminally ill patients have the right to take their own life (full article)

funeral preparations

Although pre-mature death is a cultural taboo (a "god forbid," if you will), it would be silly to live life as if we all expire at an old age.  I am very aware that despite my youth, I could die at any time.  Actually, that fact encourages me to live a more rewarding lifestyle, as any day could be the last.

Given this reality, I recently had a conversation with my dad about how I would like my body to be handled in the event of my sudden and premature death.  Particularly for those who would like preparations different than cultural or familial traditions, voicing these desires is important at any age.

Of course, there is an appropriate legal process that can guarantee one's wishes, but I think that if nontraditional methods are desired, it would be easier for the family to already be aware.

Manson killer seeks compassionate release

If a murderer is sentence to life in prison, it makes absolutely no sense to be released early because of terminal brain cancer. Either way, Susan Atkins was meant to die in prison for stabbing Sharon Tate and her fetus, tasting the blood, and using it to spell pig on the door. So who cares if she is dying early? See full article.

France rejects right-to-die plea

A French woman suffering from a rare form of cancer is unable to receive medically assisted suicide, despite liberalized legislation governing euthanasia.

"The case of Ms Sebire has however sparked intense debate and sympathy.

She suffers from an extremely rare form of cancer in the nasal cavity known as an esthesioneuroblastoma. Only 200 cases of the disease have been recorded worldwide in the past two decades.

Appealing on French television last month for the right to die, Ms Sebire said she could no longer see properly, taste or smell. She described how children ran away from her in the street."

never too late to get healthy!

so get started now.

It is never too late to reap the benefits of a healthy, active lifestyle, research has concluded.

Scientists found 70-year-olds who take regular exercise, eat well, and do not smoke greatly increase their chance of living until 90.

The researchers estimate that longevity is only at most 30% down to our genes - the rest is down to lifestyle factors.

electrocution banned in Nebraska

Nebraska finds electrocution cruel and unusual punishment

increase in US army suicides

Army officials said relationship problems were the main cause of suicides among soldiers, but those problems were increasing due to repeated long deployments as the force is strained by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

how I became an atheist

After spending some time perusing atheist blogs, I have noticed quite a few posts explaining how the blogger became an atheist. I thought I'd jump on the bandwagon.

I grew up in a bi-religious household, and the matter of religion was quite contentious in my family--to the point of hostility and division. At the age of twelve, I decided that I was Jewish, and subsequently prepared for my bat mitzvah. Prayer was very important to me. At first I prayed out of guilt, but then as a form of self-reflection and expression.

I never felt the need to attend temple--I was of the "the kingdom of god is within you" camp. My religiosity was internal, and channeled a few times a year through the big Jewish holidays. At the same time, being "good" was always at the forefront of my mind--to the point of anxiety.

As I grew older, I began to contemplate the subjective nature of religion: how I am of one because I was born in a particular place under particular circumstances, and had I been born elsewhere, I would have turned out completely differently. I humored myself with the fact that, in warfare, both sides proclaim the backing of God. And both sides will die believing such. How could a preaching Christian expect one to convert, if that same Christian would never consider conversion? And this is how institutionalized religion fell out of favor with me. And this is how self-righteousness became silly to me.

Somewhere in the year 2005, perhaps as my world view made a 180 in discovering that I need not conform to social constructions and arbitrary delineations of femininity, I suddenly came to a new conclusion:

The only reason I ever had for believing in god was the fact that I had been constantly told that I must. That was it. What a feeble, irrational reason. So I just stopped. And as of that moment, the incessant weight of behaving properly in the eye's of god, the constant worry and self-scrutiny (which was, by the way, heavily co-mingled in feminine constructions of purity), the internal debates of how I ought to behave--suddenly stopped as well.

What was funny to me was how my prayer continued despite my unflinching atheist sentiments. I knew that I was not attempting to communicate with god, but that the coerced and guilt-ridden obligation of prayer had become an avenue of self-introspection and reflection. I decided that, although this was occurring in the form of prayer, this was actually my round-about way of communicating with myself. As time progressed, this faded.

Now I can honestly and directly engage my own critical thinking and rational expression, and do not need to mediate this through a fallacious third party. But I feel terribly sorry for those who do. Being intellectually and ethically self-reliant is both empowering and rewarding.

Realizing my own atheism has been as liberating as understanding that my genitals do not obligate me to a specific lifestyle, bundle of goals, or set of behaviors. Suddenly, anything and everything is available for my exploration and mental digestion. And that, my friends, is praiseworthy.

is cremation toxic?

This is an interesting article on the alleged hazards of cremation--that I take particular interest in because I am a staunch advocate of cremation as opposed to burial.

The reason is quite simple: why are we wasting space and resources on dead corpses? Yes, yes...vomit religious rhetoric all over me--it is still dead space (ouch, no pun intended). By the way, your grave will only be visited by one--two--generations more, tops. Then, you will be a lonely old decaying carcass, not even good for letting people cry on you. By then, you won't even be wasting space for a bad reason--you'll be doing it for no reason.

Back to the controversy of cremation. Allegedly, the mercury in amalgam dental fillings--an alloy of mercury with another metal such as silver, copper or tin--releases into the atmosphere upon cremation.

When a body is burned, mercury from such fillings vaporizes. Once released into the atmosphere, mercury returns to Earth in rain or snow, ending up in lakes and other bodies of water where it can lead to elevated levels of mercury in fish. In humans, mercury damages the nervous system and can harm childhood development. Power plants, especially those that burn coal, are by far the largest source of preventable mercury releases; Environmental Protection Agency regulations have been adopted to reduce those emissions.

But the EPA does not regulate crematories because they are responsible for less than 1% of mercury emissions per annum.

There are two solutions to the problem: Install a filter on the crematory's smokestack or extract teeth of the deceased before cremation.

By the way, the cremation industry claims there is no danger. Personally, I am sure burning mercury into the atmosphere is problematic, but I don't give a shit if you yank my teeth out or filter my ashes on the way out the chimney--I will be fucking dead and my last departing wish is to have the least detrimental impact possible.

Even without the preventative measures, I wonder what is worse environmentally: all the wasted resources of graveyard maintenance, or the emissions of cavities in burning corpses?

whoa--just as I was planning to write on my views regarding the death penalty...

New Jersey will become the first state in the modern era of capital punishment to repeal the death penalty.
Nice move, New Jersey. While I am of the opinion that some people just need to be executed for stability and/or progress, I do not believe that the government should have the right to decide who lives and who dies (with inevitable warfare in the name of defense a separate matter). I guess you can say that my belief that some people are just too counter-productive to live is more theoretical and/or philosophical, because when it comes down to reality and implementation, I do not trust the federal or state government to regulate execution, nor do I wish to give either that power.

(Oy vey...I feel like some anti-choicer is going to parallel this to abortion, although the two are apples and oranges. I will address this in another post when I have some more time)

Plus, execution is not even economically feasible, given the appeals process...

animals, people, and the meaning of life

I was driving today, thinking how sad it would be if animals somehow achieved higher consciousness and realized they had no real purpose except fueling the life cycle.

And then I realized--that is exactly what happened to humans!

Would animals be like us and create all sorts of great concepts like love, religion and addiction to avoid reality?