3 ms·

These meat substitutes have allowed my vegan family to eat at places like Denny's, which basically have nothing else on the menu that we can eat. Even with the

These meat substitutes have allowed my vegan family to eat at places like Denny's, which basically have nothing else on the menu that we can eat. Even with the tides supposedly rolling back, I expect many non-veg restaurants will continue to carry these burgers as an option, and that's still a huge market.

josephcsible 4y ago
I take issue with the word "can". I don't think there are any involuntary vegans, so it's not that there's nothing else on the menu that you can eat, but rather that there's nothing else on the menu that you want to eat.
- colordrops 4y ago
  Ok, well, I didn't open this "can" of worms... But I can murder people. I can jump off a cliff without a chute. I can burn my life savings. "I can't go to the store right now. Why? Because I'll miss my appointment. Well technically you still could go to the store." By your standard, if it's not against the law of physics, then "can't" shouldn't be used. Obviously that's not how it's used idiomatically and colloquially, so there is clearly something other than physical impossibility that drives people to use the word, whether ethics, suffering, or other other frictions. I suspect you've got your own ethical stance and are trying to lay it on me.
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    But you won't go to jail, die, be destitute, or miss an appointment by eating meat. There are no consequences for not being a vegan anymore. When else is "can't" ever used for things that there'd be no consequences for doing?
    - colordrops 4y ago
      Once again, you are laying your own subjective ethical judgements on me. My ethical stance is that killing animals, whether for food or otherwise, is tantamount to murder and is completely unacceptable to me - on the level of going to jail or being destitute.
- hombre_fatal 4y ago
  Seems like an absurd objection. You could try to argue that someone could rape a woman when they say that they cannot, but they cannot because that is a gross violation of their ethics. I don’t see the issue with that language.

josephcsible 4y ago

I take issue with the word "can". I don't think there are any involuntary vegans, so it's not that there's nothing else on the menu that you can eat, but rather that there's nothing else on the menu that you want to eat.

colordrops 4y ago
Ok, well, I didn't open this "can" of worms... But I can murder people. I can jump off a cliff without a chute. I can burn my life savings. "I can't go to the store right now. Why? Because I'll miss my appointment. Well technically you still could go to the store." By your standard, if it's not against the law of physics, then "can't" shouldn't be used. Obviously that's not how it's used idiomatically and colloquially, so there is clearly something other than physical impossibility that drives people to use the word, whether ethics, suffering, or other other frictions. I suspect you've got your own ethical stance and are trying to lay it on me.
- josephcsible 4y ago
  But you won't go to jail, die, be destitute, or miss an appointment by eating meat. There are no consequences for not being a vegan anymore. When else is "can't" ever used for things that there'd be no consequences for doing?
  - colordrops 4y ago
    Once again, you are laying your own subjective ethical judgements on me. My ethical stance is that killing animals, whether for food or otherwise, is tantamount to murder and is completely unacceptable to me - on the level of going to jail or being destitute.
hombre_fatal 4y ago
Seems like an absurd objection. You could try to argue that someone could rape a woman when they say that they cannot, but they cannot because that is a gross violation of their ethics. I don’t see the issue with that language.