<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Choices</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vegansoapbox.com/choices/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vegansoapbox.com/choices/</link>
	<description>vegan theory, vegan activism, vegan video, vegan food and vegan resources for vegans, vegetarians, animal rights activists, animal liberationists, and abolitionists</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:55:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: relating veganism to feminism</title>
		<link>http://www.vegansoapbox.com/choices/comment-page-1/#comment-6417</link>
		<dc:creator>relating veganism to feminism</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:41:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vegansoapbox.com/?p=1867#comment-6417</guid>
		<description>[...] finally, a little rant I wrote almost a year ago on the topic of choice: This is the VEGAN soapbox, not the feminist soapbox. And while I personally see all rights [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] finally, a little rant I wrote almost a year ago on the topic of choice: This is the VEGAN soapbox, not the feminist soapbox. And while I personally see all rights [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sally</title>
		<link>http://www.vegansoapbox.com/choices/comment-page-1/#comment-3208</link>
		<dc:creator>Sally</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2008 21:34:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vegansoapbox.com/?p=1867#comment-3208</guid>
		<description>This is a connection that could be argued forever! 

I am willing to bet that this commenter is not vegan, yet claims to be pro-life. I am pro-life and it drives me insane that most pro-lifers put a stipulation on the end of their beliefs: Pro-life when it is an unborn child, but not when it is an animal. And don&#039;t even get me started on the fact that Republicans want the babies to be born to mothers that can&#039;t afford them, but see no need to take care of them financially through welfare programs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a connection that could be argued forever! </p>
<p>I am willing to bet that this commenter is not vegan, yet claims to be pro-life. I am pro-life and it drives me insane that most pro-lifers put a stipulation on the end of their beliefs: Pro-life when it is an unborn child, but not when it is an animal. And don&#8217;t even get me started on the fact that Republicans want the babies to be born to mothers that can&#8217;t afford them, but see no need to take care of them financially through welfare programs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://www.vegansoapbox.com/choices/comment-page-1/#comment-3183</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:46:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vegansoapbox.com/?p=1867#comment-3183</guid>
		<description>There is no way to convince people like the quoted commenter because he/she begins on the assumption that we are challenging, without actually realizing it: Why don&#039;t you care about humans? You only care about stupid animals. Our point relates back to suffering, of course,  however, this would be lost on this commenter as he/she simply appeals to the prejudice that we are criticizing. It&#039;s a no win situation - &quot;Danger Will Robinson, danger!,&quot; is what I say. Laugh and walk away.

&lt;abbr&gt;&lt;em&gt;~ Recent blog post: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.not-quiteright.net/tvg/2008/12/compassion.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Compassion&lt;/a&gt; ~&lt;/abbr&gt;&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is no way to convince people like the quoted commenter because he/she begins on the assumption that we are challenging, without actually realizing it: Why don&#8217;t you care about humans? You only care about stupid animals. Our point relates back to suffering, of course,  however, this would be lost on this commenter as he/she simply appeals to the prejudice that we are criticizing. It&#8217;s a no win situation &#8211; &#8220;Danger Will Robinson, danger!,&#8221; is what I say. Laugh and walk away.</p>
<p><abbr><em>~ Recent blog post: <a href="http://www.not-quiteright.net/tvg/2008/12/compassion.html" rel="nofollow">Compassion</a> ~</em></abbr></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jill K. Tew</title>
		<link>http://www.vegansoapbox.com/choices/comment-page-1/#comment-3176</link>
		<dc:creator>Jill K. Tew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 02:16:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vegansoapbox.com/?p=1867#comment-3176</guid>
		<description>This is a fact. All live births will-at some point in time(one second later or a hundred years later) end in death. All conceptions will NOT end in birth. It&#039;s not the same.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a fact. All live births will-at some point in time(one second later or a hundred years later) end in death. All conceptions will NOT end in birth. It&#8217;s not the same.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Perverts : Elaine Vigneault</title>
		<link>http://www.vegansoapbox.com/choices/comment-page-1/#comment-3175</link>
		<dc:creator>Perverts : Elaine Vigneault</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 00:17:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vegansoapbox.com/?p=1867#comment-3175</guid>
		<description>[...] to see the image in a larger size. This comment was left in response to &#8220;choices&#8221; wherein I made the points: It doesn’t matter if you think I’m hypocritical for [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to see the image in a larger size. This comment was left in response to &#8220;choices&#8221; wherein I made the points: It doesn’t matter if you think I’m hypocritical for [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.vegansoapbox.com/choices/comment-page-1/#comment-3169</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:03:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vegansoapbox.com/?p=1867#comment-3169</guid>
		<description>I and most vegans aren&#039;t vegan because we&#039;re &quot;pro-life&quot; in some sort of abstract sense--after all, almost all of us kill plants as a result of our diet, right?  We&#039;re vegan because we oppose the way animals who are used by humans in various ways are treated. We oppose their being made to undergo pain and suffering and/or have their lives shortened purely for humans&#039; pleasure or convenience.  

None of these considerations apply to a human zygote (newly fertilized egg), embryo, or early-term fetus. Although it is as alive as any plant, it literally has no nervous system to begin with and not enough of one to experience pain and suffering or have a will to survive for the first several weeks of pregnancy.  I agree that an ethical dilemma develops as the pregnancy proceeds and nervous system development makes these things possible, but I don&#039;t agree that there is anything ethically problematic about abortion in the early stages, before there is a developed nervous system. 

Of course, anyone who criticizes vegans for being pro-choice but continues to use animal products is utterly hypocritical, considering that using animal products almost always results in animals suffering, whereas abortion can only cause suffering if the fetus has a well-developed nervous system.  And the whole &quot;but abortion takes a life&quot; argument is ridiculous.  Unless all someone eats is fruit, they have to take lives (plants at least) just to stay alive themselves.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I and most vegans aren&#8217;t vegan because we&#8217;re &#8220;pro-life&#8221; in some sort of abstract sense&#8211;after all, almost all of us kill plants as a result of our diet, right?  We&#8217;re vegan because we oppose the way animals who are used by humans in various ways are treated. We oppose their being made to undergo pain and suffering and/or have their lives shortened purely for humans&#8217; pleasure or convenience.  </p>
<p>None of these considerations apply to a human zygote (newly fertilized egg), embryo, or early-term fetus. Although it is as alive as any plant, it literally has no nervous system to begin with and not enough of one to experience pain and suffering or have a will to survive for the first several weeks of pregnancy.  I agree that an ethical dilemma develops as the pregnancy proceeds and nervous system development makes these things possible, but I don&#8217;t agree that there is anything ethically problematic about abortion in the early stages, before there is a developed nervous system. </p>
<p>Of course, anyone who criticizes vegans for being pro-choice but continues to use animal products is utterly hypocritical, considering that using animal products almost always results in animals suffering, whereas abortion can only cause suffering if the fetus has a well-developed nervous system.  And the whole &#8220;but abortion takes a life&#8221; argument is ridiculous.  Unless all someone eats is fruit, they have to take lives (plants at least) just to stay alive themselves.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Luciana</title>
		<link>http://www.vegansoapbox.com/choices/comment-page-1/#comment-3166</link>
		<dc:creator>Luciana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:03:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vegansoapbox.com/?p=1867#comment-3166</guid>
		<description>I was luck because in my biology class, a decade plus some ago, my professor told everyone that had a moral issue with dissecting the pig that they did not have to participate, and that they would not be marked down as long as they knew the anatomy on the test. I didn&#039;t, and I still got an &quot;A.&quot;

I admit I was still an omni at the time, but something about the situation just seemed particularly wrong to me.

I am pro-choice, but to me it makes no sense to be pro-life, but only when it applies to certain lives that could not survive outside the mother and which do not require also killing the mother simply so some kids can poke around with their baby.

The other issue is *choice*. No one asked the sow if she wanted to have her baby taken and if they could kill her in the process, now did they?

Just my two-cents, though.

Thanks so much for the blog. Your blog and others like it really help me stay vegan.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was luck because in my biology class, a decade plus some ago, my professor told everyone that had a moral issue with dissecting the pig that they did not have to participate, and that they would not be marked down as long as they knew the anatomy on the test. I didn&#8217;t, and I still got an &#8220;A.&#8221;</p>
<p>I admit I was still an omni at the time, but something about the situation just seemed particularly wrong to me.</p>
<p>I am pro-choice, but to me it makes no sense to be pro-life, but only when it applies to certain lives that could not survive outside the mother and which do not require also killing the mother simply so some kids can poke around with their baby.</p>
<p>The other issue is *choice*. No one asked the sow if she wanted to have her baby taken and if they could kill her in the process, now did they?</p>
<p>Just my two-cents, though.</p>
<p>Thanks so much for the blog. Your blog and others like it really help me stay vegan.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

