• Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    That’s not the definition of vegan. The definition of vegan is a person who abstains from animal products. Plants are not animal products.

    Eating a venus flytrap is also removing a plant that eats animals.

    • agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      There are plenty of vegans who would tell you they abstain from any products of animal suffering, otherwise they would use products that were tested on animals. Just because you test lipstick on animals, doesn’t make the lipstick a product of animals, its a product of animal suffering. Your definition is not the only one and doesn’t exclude animal tested products, which many vegans go out of their way to avoid.

        • agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          And those are both products of animal suffering, a common definition many vegans use. Come on, now you’re just being obtuse on purpose.

          • MadMaurice@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            I think it’s a stretch to say that a venus fly trap dish is immoral because the venus fly trap ate an animal, which it is literally forced to do by nature. You don’t blame a lion either for eating meat, because it is literally a carnivore and cannot survive otherwise. I believe when they say animal suffering they mean suffering resulting from exploitation and so on by humans.