"if someone kills a human being for me, in my name, I will not agree, nor will I condone the murder (but I can forgive the murderer)
If someone steals for me, I will not take as a gift the result of their theft. Perhaps it is not up to me to tell the person to stop stealing (that may be another discussion) but I should not become an accomplice to his crime by taking the stolen gift, I will not make myself complicit.
So if a person kills for me and serves me the flesh of the murdered animal, or has another kill for him and serves me the flesh of the animal, this animal that I believe is a sacred creation of God, that we are meant to look over and nurture, this offends me, of course it should.
Likewise I must have compassion for the poor meat-eater (forgive them for they know not what they do) and accept that his intentions where good, and that he simply has not extended his circle of compassion to other species yet. This is an opportunity for me to educate this person, if I just eat the "food" I am teaching nothing to this person, and I am condoning the crime that he has commited (in my name)
so when someone makes non-vegetarian food for you, it is not unchristian to thank them for their intention but to refuse to eat the food, and explaijn to the person why you have refused. And I believe that is what Jesus would've done (and again this is simply my personal opinion) and I believe that is what we could do, while respecting kindness, forgiveness and compassion for all."






i definitely agree with the above (taken from the link antoine posted) even though i don't believe in jesus...if he did exist i would say he was probably vegan...or at least i think he would agree with vegan philosophy...but as much as i hear what you're saying about educating and not encouraging a sin by participating in it...i have to respectfully disagree

local fisherman and hunters here kill fish and pigs as part of their tradition...(i have engaged in some discussion with them about alternatives, but they refuse to even consider the idea of vegetarianism...no matter what arguments i use)...even though i had requested not to be given gifts of meat from long time family friends, i still used to receive the occasional fish.

at that point, it has already been killed...it has been given to me as part of a cultural gesture of good-will, and i have tried explaining to them my beliefs...to refuse at then is as much a disrespect to the person as it is to their tradition...and also the food will "go to waste"...

this is where i was coming from in the past...so i have accepted it...but explained yet AGAIN that i would rather have fruits or vegetables or nothing at all given to me as a present...since i have continued to be so adamant about it...the gifts of meat have stopped...yet i know my relationship with certain people is no longer the same...they think i am rude and ungrateful...as well as snobby for refusing their food...(and by the same token--their culture)

now regarding the "waste" of an animal already killed for food...what would jesus do? (heheh) or any "true" vegan? would they give the animal to someone else, to have someone else eat it? would they have a funeral and bury it? what would be the proper way to dispose of a dead animal given as a cultural gift? (i hope i'm not steering the conversation too off topic with these questions)

oh and btw antoine, in that religious forum someone used the excuse that i personally despise the most: "some people HAVE to eat meat or they'll be sick. they can't eat meat alternatives" or something to that effect. your response was great...as seems to be the norm for you.

one more thing about labels...i don't want to put myself into a label because i am not the only one defining that label, as MdJ complains about others using the term "vegan" to suit their desires...you'll find the same thing in any group...

that's what a label is...something that arbitrarily lumps you into a category with a bunch of other people who also consider themselves part of that group...whether they qualify or not..

i take offense at those who claim to be vegetarian and eat chicken or fish...or those who claim to be christian and support the war...or call themselves democrats and voted for Bush...etc....but then i realize that i am not the only one defining those terms...those terms take on different meanings for different people...and while it would be nice if everyone could agree on a definition and stick to it, that's just not how humanity functions...so rather than getting pissed at the so-called vegans who eat honey and have a leather purse (like you were given the purse before you chose veganism and didn't want to get rid of it)...i simply choose to worry more about how i define my own beliefs and what they mean to me...

basically, i'm agreeing with you Antoine, i like the ideals behind the abstract, dictionary definition VEGAN...but in reality there are some vegans i'd rather not be associated with...in name or deed...and since i can't stop them from calling themselves whatever they want...i choose to try not to put myself in the same box...(overall i haven't met too many vegans i disagree with though...i think my fear of labeling really stems more from sexual orientation labels and ethnicity labels...but hopefully you get my point)

to tie this in with antoine's and shannon's comment, mdjg, would you also then say:

"if you wear wool/leather/suede etc., kindly stop calling yourself vegan."

or, / and if so, then further...

"if your cheap shoes from the second hand store have some leather/suede on them, kindly stop..."

where do you draw the line in your version of "being vegan"?

Uh... I just meant I'm sure most people here agree with you.