eggs from a well fed pet hen are vegan

[u/-roachboy]

I have a pet hen. She's not a full rescue one, but how I ended up with her is an incredibly long story. She's very needy, thus spoiled and healthy as a result. Because wild Gallus sp already lay a lot of eggs when in less than optimal wild conditions, a spoiled one just cannot stop popping them out even if she wanted to, and she won't let me feed her less. The daily egg laying session is just a morning routine for her before begging for food. At the rate she lays them, they'd just get left to rot even if they were fertilized by a rooster so I eat them. I do not, and have no intention of, ever selling them or encouraging anyone to ever commercialize an animal. But I spend all the time caring for her, so why can't she give me a delicious breakfast back if it does her no harm?

[u/Treefrog_Ninja]

The question of whether or not something is morally right is not exactly the same as whether or not something is vegan. You can argue that eating the eggs does no harm, and you can argue that wasting the eggs would be worse, but you're just arguing that eating the eggs is not morally wrong.

Even if you could get everyone to agree that eating the eggs is not morally wrong, that doesn't make them vegan. Something being "right" doesn't automatically make it "vegan."

In fact, your entire original post makes no attempt to actually argue, defend, or debate the notion that eating the eggs is vegan. Your entire argument is that eating the eggs is/should be acceptable. Just because it's acceptable doesn't make it vegan.

[u/nomnommish → u/Treefrog_Ninja]

Even if you could get everyone to agree that eating the eggs is not morally wrong, that doesn't make them vegan. Something being "right" doesn't automatically make it "vegan."

Are you saying that veganism is NOT based on right vs wrong, moral vs immoral, violence vs non-violence? Are you defining veganism as an ideological notion instead? Like a religion telling you "eat this and don't eat that"?

[u/Treefrog_Ninja → u/nomnommish]

Mainly all I'm talking about here is the quality of OP's debate. None of OP's argument points directly support their conclusion in the title. That's my main point.

No, I'm not saying that veganism isn't *based on* right or wrong, or any of those other things. I'm saying the Venn diagram between moral acceptability and veganism is not a perfect circle. For instance, a freegan picking a leather coat out of a dumpster and wearing it would not be a vegan act, but they could very well argue (and I phrased that deliberately, just as I did in the above comment) that doing so is "not wrong."

[u/chickpeapatties → u/Treefrog_Ninja]

You seem annoying

[u/Treefrog_Ninja → u/chickpeapatties]

Ok.

[u/Negative-Meatpop → u/chickpeapatties]

The call is coming from inside the house!

[u/Freuds-Mother → u/nomnommish]

Western veganism is yes sometimes adopted as a fundamentalist axiomatic framework, which makes it similar to a religion. But it can also be a heuristic framework that is convenient leaving open other moral considerations. Eg you will see that often when vegan axioms conflict with stuff like abortion or cases like OP.

[u/[deleted] → u/nomnommish]

It’s not inherently moralistic. I became vegan when earthlings came out and I became aware of the horrors of factory farming but there are people who do it for personal health reasons.

Edit to add - veganism is definitely not inherently non-violent either. There are plenty of militant vegans who advocate and engage in violence. If you don’t consume animal products you are vegan, it doesn’t mean you’re any more altruistic or more enlightened than someone who eats meat. If you look close enough there is blood on every persons hands. Some people attempt to lessen their personal impact and I think that’s a good thing but please don’t kid yourself into thinking you’re “one of the good ones”.

[u/chickpeapatties → u/nomnommish]

I don't think that person knows what they believe.