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.
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
It’s funny how this is downvoted. Not that I agree, but wouldn’t that be the logical conclusion?
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
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.
The issue for vegans is whether animal slaughter was involved and whether they supported it with their purchase.
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?
