Philosophical Vegan Forum

In my school, we have this large club called C.A.T.C.H. (conversations about tolerance, civility, and humanity). Basically, each week, someone leads a session about the topic they signed up to lead for. I want to do one about animal rights/welfare with a vegetarian friend of mine because I think it's a way to possibly create new veg*ns.

I want to make people think without seeming too preachy, and I don't want anyone to think I'm attacking them or whatever. I was thinking I'd start it something like this:

"Raise your hand if you would eat a cat or dog unnecessarily."
"Raise your hand if you eat meat."
"Reflect."

But I was talking to a freegan friend, and she said that she didn't think I should "attack all the non-vegans."
Is this attacking them?

I also want to throw in an article about factory farming there somewhere. Maybe this? http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/07/us/ta ... d=all&_r=0
There are a lot to choose from.

What grade level are we talking here?

6-12th.
The club has middle and high schoolers.

This just happened today. It was great.

Lots of misconceptions, but they were easy to address. There was this moral relativist though. I asked them if they thought it was subjective whether or not stoning gays was wrong.
"Yes."
WTF? A utilitarian friend of mine said we should apply utilitarianism to the discussion (without actually using the word), deeming whatever causes most happiness the best choice, which I know there are flaws with, but I agree with pretty much everything that would lead to in practice, and I didn't want to change the discussion to that.

That was a very small part, though. Most of it was awesome. Here were the guiding questions:
1) Do you eat meat?
2) What do you believe is the difference between eating a dog and eating a cow, ethically?
3) Have you looked into how animals are raised in the meat/dairy/egg industries?
4) Would you still eat the animals if you had to kill them yourself?
5) If you eat meat, do you consider yourself an animal lover?
6) Do you think the government should change the way they deal with the meat industry?
7) Do you feel that the people who eat meat are responsible for the deaths of animals?
8) What do you think about animal testing for cosmetics (shampoo, soap, etc.)? If you fund it, why?

I was pleasantly surprised by how open-minded some people were.

Also, I did this with a friend, and at the end, the advisor gave us the final word. I let her start.
"We created this CATCH topic because we are both vegans..."

I didn't even know she was a vegan until she said that. She never told me she went from vegetarian to vegan. It was awesome.

As for my final word, I said that I think people should really consider the issue more. Nobody really questions it, being that it is just the norm, and that people should think about reducing their intake and maybe gradually eliminating completely.

Then there was the aftershow, and for my final word there I just addressed problems, because I only had 45 seconds.

Happy rant over.

I certainly enjoyed reading your happy rant. It's great that you had the opportunity to speak to so many open-minded people and inspire them to engage in critical thinking about such an important issue of fundamental justice. I find myself wishing that I had become vegan at a far younger age. Anyways I can't change my past, each of us who are vegan now can and must focus on our activism in the present and future. Once again, good work on speaking out for the innocent beings who depend on you!

Thanks!^

EquALLity wrote: Thanks!^

You're welcome. Keep up the good work for the animals' sake!

Great job!

EquALLity wrote:There was this moral relativist though. I asked them if they thought it was subjective whether or not stoning gays was wrong.
"Yes."

It sounds like you destroyed his credibility pretty well before the class, which is about the best you can do with relativists in a limited amount of time. Nobody will take him seriously if he's saying stoning gays isn't wrong.

EquALLity wrote:A utilitarian friend of mine said we should apply utilitarianism to the discussion (without actually using the word), deeming whatever causes most happiness the best choice, which I know there are flaws with, but I agree with pretty much everything that would lead to in practice, and I didn't want to change the discussion to that.

You might just mention briefly how suffering is like negative happiness, so it's important to consider that. Then move on as quickly as possible to get back on track.

EquALLity wrote:I didn't even know she was a vegan until she said that. She never told me she went from vegetarian to vegan. It was awesome.

That's great!
Congratulations on such a success!

brimstoneSalad wrote:It sounds like you destroyed his credibility pretty well before the class, which is about the best you can do with relativists in a limited amount of time. Nobody will take him seriously if he's saying stoning gays isn't wrong.

You'd think that, but two people actually agreed (they just shouted it- actually more like calling it out without really yelling). More people from what I know disagreed (thinking about the people I know personally who were there/two people who spoke -including my friend-/someone who said they agreed with me as a general statement about the topic), but I didn't really get an exact sense of the numbers because we moved on very quickly and only one person brought it up again in discussion.

I'm hoping nobody actually thinks that it's just up subjective whether or not that's ok. Jesus.

That person was actually female by the way, not that it really matters.

Oh, did I say stoning? I meant to write hanging. That doesn't really matter either, though.

brimstoneSalad wrote:You might just mention briefly how suffering is like negative happiness, so it's important to consider that. Then move on as quickly as possible to get back on track.

I think he factored that in actually (I don't remember his exact words), but there are other things.

brimstoneSalad wrote:That's great!
Congratulations on such a success!

Yeah! I was not expecting that at all.

Thanks!

ArmouredAbolitionist wrote: You're welcome. Keep up the good work for the animals' sake!

Hey, thanks again!

Alright!