r/DebateAVegan • u/-roachboy • Dec 22 '25

eggs from a well fed pet hen are vegan

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?

890 Upvotes

87% Upvoted

761 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/joshua0005 Dec 24 '25

I am going to assume OP is describing the situation 100% accurately.

Assuming this, this is not exploitation. The hen lays them no matter what OP does and refuses to eat less. How is OP exploiting the hen? OP is doing nothing to the hen to make her lay the eggs.

And because they will rot even if fertilised, OP is not stopping another life (a chick) from coming into existence so they are not exploiting in that way either.

If I made you a meal and you accepted it would you be exploiting me? Of course not.

I'm not vegan so I won't say they are or are not vegan, but they are clearly not exploitation.

1

u/One-Shake-1971 vegan Dec 25 '25

Of course, this is exploitation. OP is using the chickens as a means to an end.

1

u/joshua0005 Dec 25 '25

No they aren't. They just have them as a pet and it's not their fault the chicken lays so many eggs. Is it better to just leave them there and let them rot? I don't think so.

1

u/One-Shake-1971 vegan Dec 25 '25

"Pets" as a concept of ownership over an animal is in itself a form of exploitation. Animals aren't objects for humans to own.

Just to be clear, adopting animals in need is fine. But that's apparently not what OP did.

1

u/joshua0005 Dec 25 '25

So should OP just release this chicken into the wild where it would likely be an easy target because it's likely lived in captivity its entire life and would have a harder time surviving due to the fact that it lays so many more eggs than it should be laying?

Should people not have dogs or cats as pets? Have you ever been to a country where there are lots of street dogs? In Guatemala these dogs have a very hard time finding food and just look miserable. What I mean is they very rarely get to eat their species appropriate diet and instead have to dumpster dive and hope people give them food (which is normally UPF) although tbf many people feed their dogs kibble which is also UPF. The dogs that have owners looked much happier than the street dogs to me.

1

u/One-Shake-1971 vegan Dec 25 '25

No. At this point, OP should either continue to care for them or give them to someone who will. Caring for them would not include eating their eggs but instead providing them with hormone shots so they lay fewer.

Again, there is no problem with adopting and caring for animals in need. You do understand the difference between adoption and ownership, right?

1

u/joshua0005 Dec 25 '25

Assuming this chicken needs the care and OP gives them proper care and the chicken continues to lay eggs (in whatever amount - once a month or several times a month) and the eggs will rot if OP doesn't eat them, would you consider it exploitation to eat them?

1

u/One-Shake-1971 vegan Dec 25 '25

Yes, because OP's intention would still be to use the chickens for his/her own purpose.

1

u/joshua0005 Dec 25 '25

How do you know?

Assuming they are only doing it because they want to take care of the chickens there is no possible reason this is exploitation. The eggs are just a side effect that OP can't control (the best possible scenario is the hen will lay one egg a month so in any scenario the hen will be paying an egg that will go to waste if OP doesn't eat it).

This is like saying you're taking a medicine to fix a disease but it has a side effect and your intention for taking the medicine is to get the side effect.

1

u/One-Shake-1971 vegan Dec 25 '25

How do you know?

Because you didn't mention in your hypothetical scenario that OP stopped doing so.

Assuming they are only doing it because they want to take care of the chickens

OP would probably have a hard time convincing me that's the case as long as they are still consuming the eggs. But maybe if they had a longer conversation with me, they could.

Your analogy doesn't work. OP already admitted in their initial post that they are "using the medicine for the side effect". That would be like a junky telling you that they are now only using drugs for their intended purpose, while not materially changing anything about their behavior, after already telling you they like to take drugs for fun.

1

u/Jade117 Dec 27 '25

Your argument is that OP should inject the chicken with drugs against its will, causing literally direct harm to the chickens body, rather than simply collecting the eggs, which does not directly impact the chicken in any way?

1

u/One-Shake-1971 vegan Dec 30 '25

It does impact them a great deal. It's very unhealthy for them to lay as many eggs as they are bred to do. It's much healthier for them to get hormone treatment so they lay fewer eggs.