Wouldn't it make sense that vegans who are vegan for ethical reasons also be Pro-Life?

Question

I don't know about all other vegans but one of the most prominent reasons that I am a vegan is that I am against the taking of any life. By this reasoning why should I also not be against the taking of a human life, no matter the age?

Answer 1

I have noticed that many vegans are pro life, more than other groups of people. I am too. (both vegan and pro life- to me those two go hand in hand)

The way I see it, life begins the very second the sperm fertilizes the egg. That moment new life is created no matter how tiny, how unaware, how depended on the mother...

I used to be stubbornly against this kind of reasoning until it dawned on me one day. I know many people don’t see it as a murder, but I do, and I couldn’t live my life as a hypocrite, saving one life, taking another...

But still there are many vegans that are ok with abortion. So you definitely cant take it for granted that all vegans are pro-life. I think it's 50/50. But not sure.


for the kid that commented on vegans saying you may as well feed lions with salad. How did you ever pass biology? Lions need meat, humans dont. people have been vegeterians and vegans for a very long time, it is proven as healthy. Educate yourself please.

Answer 2

i'm vegetarian yet i'm additionally professional-lifestyles. and a great number of vegetarians DO think of animal lifestyles is greater significant than human lifestyles. I in no way understood how all and sundry who particularly loves residing issues could be in choose of abortion. they'll make up all varieties of excuses like the fetus won't be able to stay with out the mummy, or the fetus isn't a residing element, and so on. All excuses to justify murdering an harmless element. everybody knows that if left on my own to advance and be born, a fetus will develop right into a healthful, residing individual. to disclaim that's only being straightforward stupid. Faye, you're an fool and a hypocrite. "inflicting the smallest quantity of harm achievable. Believing that avoidable suffering could desire to be prevented. Respecting the different animals that share this planet with us." yet, you have faith it is okay to kill an unborn infant. If this isn't a hypocrite i don't be attentive to what's. after which you evaluate a human fetus to a tick on your leg? Please stop posting right here, you're making all vegans appear as if complete morons.

Answer 3

I"m a bit unresolved on this issue because I
fear that unplanned births that are forced
could lead to more people in poverty and
more crime.

The same neo-cons who want to end abortion
also want to get rid of social security and
welfare programs. If they get their way on
both these items it will only lead to problems.
The very people who are born on the streets
will grow up to become robbers and beggars.
Amazingly neo-cons argue that the general
public has to pay for the misdeeds of others
and that social security/welfare programs
create a heavy tax burden. They want to
rid the country of one of the only things
that keeps the population in check. I find
this ironic.

Unfortunately we cannot force people to be
sexually responsible with their bodies.
Adoption won't solve the problem either
because most people who can afford to
adopt opt to go to the black market in
order to get a baby from a specific
gene pool or they adopt from abroad.

I personally take precautions in my
relationships that keep women from
having to make a decision like this.
I think that this makes me pro-life in
my personal life.

However, I think the option needs to be there
for the sake of society as a whole.

All one need do is take a look at
poor income trailer parks, projects,
and ghettoes. Statistically most people
born into these situations do not stand
a chance. The pattern is that the unplanned,
beget more unplanned children and poverty
spirals as a result. The question for an
unprepared mother becomes: Is it
humane for me to have this child who will
grow up to suffer? Is it in the best interest
of the unborn?
It's a question that I don't feel I have the
right to answer for each and every individual
in each and every case with a blanket
policy.
Sorry but I cannot in full concience totally
agree with you on this because I donot
feel that I can force my own beliefs on
others nor that the government should.
Also, I do not want our laws to be
inadvertantly responsible for newly
born crack babies and future felons
having been brought into the world.

In a perfect world you could ban the
practice of terminating pregnancies
without any repercussions.
Whoever, this isn't a perfect world and
if the law was overturned it would be
like inviting crime into everyone's
backyard. There's no gate that can
keep an overload of fustrated hungry,
desperate people out.

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not
accusing you of being right-wing and
I respect your stance. However, I think
it's an issue to complicated for the
government too a have a broad sweeping
mandate on.

Answer 4

Despite what Science (millions of planets could have living things) would tell us Life is special. We only KNOW of one place in the entire universe that has life. That's the Earth. Humans are even more special. We have knowledge,and can effect positively or negatively our environment more than any other animal. Other animals are balanced if the population gets too big they either starve or their predation increases or they have disease problems. Something will keep the population in check. Not so with people we over come our natural checks and balances. We farm we import and export from other environments to get what we need to survive. We make medicine to cure disease. We build houses to keep predators at bay. We are special.
To take a life just so you can go on living your lifestyle seems very shallow and evil to me.

Answer 5

What doesn't make sense is that so many people who are pro-life partake in the slaughtering of animals.

Of course, it also doesn't make sense that most people who are "pro-life" never adopt any of the children from our over-crowded foster facilities.

If everyone actually was pro life in the actual sense of the term, imagine what a wonderful world we would have. No killing. Everyone having someone to love.

As far as the pro-life *issue,* a pregnancy is the issue of the woman. If you really want to be pro-life, adopt a child. Find some way to make the foster and adoption system a plausible option. Work to allow gays and all other healthy, loving walks of life the right to provide loving homes so all children can actually have someone who will care about their day and tuck them in at night. Help spread education about birth control.

Standing around yelling at and condemning women with a horrible choice to make does nothing but make lazy people with pseudo-morals feel good about themselves.
:)
...just my opinion.

Answer 6

Actually your reasoning is logically sound. Pacifism, animal rights, and anti abortion views are actually all part of an ethic that values protection of all sentient beings. But most vegans are brainwashed into thinking along certain political ruts. They would be the last to face this.
From a biological standpoint there is no question that once an embryo is conceived it is a separate human being residing in a mother's womb. Some people just can't deal with this scientific FACT. Thus it seems quite hypocritical to on one hand to refrain from eating meat so as not to kill other sentient beings and even in some cases becoming an activist to protect animals from slaughter and at the same time not wishing to protect humans who haven't yet slipped into the sunlight but who nonetheless are alive, biologically unique individuals capable of experiencing thought and pain.
A woman has a right to choose and to protect her own body. . HOWEVER, the embryo is in the woman's body, but it is not, biologically, her body!. It is a separate sentient being. I personally think the hypocrisy is so unconscious and the resistance to the obvious logic so profound that there is no reasoning with these people. I am a thirty year vegan activist, an embryologist, a pacifist, and a person who feels abortion is murder. All the arguments about the pro-lifers not adopting and about the needs of the pregnant woman do not change the obvious fact that abortion is the killing of a unique and innocent life. The person who has genuine compassion for the animals a farmer slaughters but absolutely no compassion for the slaughtered infant, the person who can on one hand cry out about the slaughter of innocent, sentient animals but who has no space in his or her heart for the slaughter of innocent, sentient humans is not thinking clearly or consistently.

I am including one more point to respond to another answerer who said that the fetus doesn't have the right to "demand that a woman carry it in her body. " This is absurd on many levels, the first and formost of which is that, except in the realtively rare cases
or rape or incest (of the 1,000,000 abortions performed in the US each year statistically few are because of rape or incest) the woman willingly had sex!!!! It's not as if the baby just appeared in her womb by some unwanted and unasked for act of God. She caused it to be there, whether by
omitting birth control or failed birth
control, or just changing her mind about being pregnant. She had the sex!! She has already had her opportunity to not carry a baby and she chose to have the sex. Now the life has begun. Deal with it!! Murder is murder, no matter how sympathetic the murderer. What if the woman didn't want her baby sleeping in the crib in the bedroom. The same arguments used for abortion can be used for infanticide.

It might be argued that the sex that led to the pregnancy was a mistake. And it is not a bigger mistake on a whole other moral order of magnitude to murder a baby in its mother's womb?!

Finally, in an effort to deflect attention from the irrationality of their positions, some have argued that opposers of abortion should be adopting. In fact many of the adoption agencies and homes for unwed mothers waiting to give babies up for adoption are run by pro-lifers. Secondly, the need for adoptable infants far outstrips the availability, so most infants who are aborted would actually find homes if carried to term.

Vegans who claim to protect animals and who are okay with this sort of human genocide should take a hard look at their own hypocrisy.

I will add that the argument that abortion controls population growth among the impoverished portion of the society IS a sound argument, but it is not in keeping with the Vegan moraltiy of protecting sentient life.

Answer 7

Hypothetically it makes sence. But how often doeslife fit into a hypothetical mold? It sounds good in theory,but everyone is different fordifferent reasons.

Answer 8

Pro-Life has come to mean- "The law should prohibit abortion and impose sanctions if done."

Thus, they are only comparable if you also believe that "The law should prohibit exploitation of animals and impose sanctions if done."

While some may believe the latter, it is probably best to keep this view to yourself, as it isn't going to happen anytime soon, and we don't yet have sufficient numbers to deal with the backlash from an attempt.

You can be opposed to abortion, and even work to discourage it through education, contraception, adoption assistance and still be pro-choice.

It depends on what rights you want to assign to animals. I believe in basic sovereignty over one's own body. So killing an animal would be an encroachment on this right.
A female also has sovereignty over her own body, so for me to restrict what she does with it (consumption of drugs, alcohol, euthanasia, abortion) would also be an encroachment of this right.

Does a fetus have rights? Perhaps, but these rights are in conflict with its mother. I do not believe that a fetus has the right to force its mother to carry it to term.

Answer 9

I don't get it either. I think it's a bit hypocritical and maybe ************ to save the life of an animal but condemn your own kind to die.

Answer 10

This is not the place to ask this question....regardless of that, it's like asking meat eaters how they can be pro-life when they contribute to the taking of animal lives. Diet choices do not go hand in hand with abortion choices. I just think this is a poor taste to ask this sort of question here.

Don't judge others unless you have walked in their shoes.