• fireweed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    There are vegan blood meal alternatives out there to resolve this exact conundrum.

    But the reality is, unless your plants are being grown hydroponically in a sealed warehouse or similar, chances are real good that they are feeding on decaying animals (either directly or indirectly) whether you like it or not. They’re mostly insects and annelids and such, but still animals.

    I think the issue for vegans is more about whether animal slaughter was involved in making their fertilizer. Dead pillbugs in the soil is just nature doing its cycle of life thing.

    • superkret@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      The issue for vegans is whether animal slaughter was involved and whether they supported it with their purchase.

      • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        Its easiest to treat paying for something the same as doing it firsthand.

        It gets really strange to find the line that separates how far away from an immoral act you need to be to be considered moral still. In the same room? In the same building? What if you don’t explicitly ask someone to do the immoral thing, and only ask for the remains of it?

      • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        a common definition of nature is the stuff that is untouched by humans.

        as wiktionary puts it:

        flora and fauna as distinct from human conventions, art, and technology

        • Kwiila@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Some indigenous peoples cooperate with their natural environment. Humans are fundamentally a keystone species that’s collectively gotten really bad at it, to get good at other things. We could have human conventions, art, and technology that works entirely with nature and our environment rather than against it. Between these facts, I’m not a fan of that definition.

      • Ignotum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        If i see you get attacked by wild animals i guess i won’t try to help you, wouldn’t want to go against nature or anything

        • Grubberfly 🔮
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s funny how this is downvoted. Not that I agree, but wouldn’t that be the logical conclusion?

          • Ignotum@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Rest assured, i don’t agree with it either, but as you say this seems to follow from the statement

            We shouldn’t treat/cure cancer, cancer happens in nature and we’re a part of nature
            We shouldn’t try to prevent rape, rape happens in nature and we’re part of nature
            We shouldn’t try to limit animal suffering, animal suffering happens in nature and we’re part of nature

            It’s the good old argument from naturalism

    • teamevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      Life feeds on life feeds on life, plants don’t care how you died just how your nutrients are able to be absorbed.

    • anivia@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Doesn’t have to be hydroponics, using coco coir instead of soil will also fix that issue