The analogy between racism\/sexism and \u201cspeciesism\u201d is alas incoherent.
\nRacism is (negative) discrimination between human beings on the basis of race. Sexism is (negative) discrimination between human beings on the basis of gender. It is transparent that both of these are unjust, unnecessary and unjustifiable.<\/p>\n
But we eat plants, who are also species. We have no choice. Otherwise humans could not survive (currently). It is a case of conflict of vital (life\/death) interests<\/i>. To be non-discriminatory between species would require either remaining omnivores toward all species or not consuming any species.<\/p>\n
(We also fight harmful microbes; that too is a conflict of vital interest.)<\/p>\n
A foundation for veganism that is logical, coherent and realistic requires a more careful qualification:<\/p>\n
“It is wrong to kill or harm a sentient being in the absence of conflict of vital<\/u> interest<\/i> <\/b>(survival, health, harm — certainly not for pleasure or profit)”<\/p>\n
This principle is species-neutral, but it preserves the right of every individual, human or nonhuman, to try to survive, free of harm.<\/p>\n
L\u2019analogie entre le racisme\/sexisme et le \u00ab sp\u00e9cisme \u00bb est h\u00e9las incoh\u00e9rente. Le racisme est la discrimination (n\u00e9gative) entre les humains bas\u00e9e sur leur race. Le sexisme est la discrimination (n\u00e9gative) entre les humains bas\u00e9e sur leur genre. C\u2019est transparent que ces deux sortes de discrimination n\u00e9gatives sont injustes, non-n\u00e9cessaires et injustifiables.<\/p>\n
Mais on mange les plantes, qui sont \u00e9galement des esp\u00e8ces. On n\u2019a pas de choix. Sans \u00e7a les humains ne peuvent pas survivre (actuellement). C\u2019est un conflit des int\u00e9r\u00eats vitaux (de survie ou de mort). Ne pas discriminer (n\u00e9gativement) entre les esp\u00e8ces n\u00e9cessiterait soit de demeurer omnivore envers toute esp\u00e8ce ou de ne consommer aucune esp\u00e8ce.<\/p>\n
(On lutte aussi contre les microbes nocifs; \u00e7a aussi c\u2019est un conflit d\u2019int\u00e9r\u00eat vital.)<\/p>\n
Un fondement logique, coh\u00e9rent et r\u00e9aliste pour le v\u00e9ganisme n\u00e9cessite une qualification plus soigneuse: <\/p>\n
\u201cIl est mal de tuer ou de faire mal \u00e0 un \u00eatre sensible dans l’absence d’un conflit d\u2019int\u00e9r\u00eat vital<\/u><\/i><\/b> (survie, sant\u00e9, souffrance \u2014 certes pas pour le plaisir ou le profit)”. <\/p>\n
Ce principe est neutre vis-\u00e0-vis les esp\u00e8ces mais il prot\u00e8ge le droit de tout individu, humain ou non-humain, \u00e0 tenter de survivre, hors de mal.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The analogy between racism\/sexism and \u201cspeciesism\u201d is alas incoherent. Racism is (negative) discrimination between human beings on the basis of race. Sexism is (negative) discrimination between human beings on the basis of gender. It is transparent that both of these are unjust, unnecessary and unjustifiable. But we eat plants, who are also species. We have … <\/p>\n