Vegan deep dish I made from scratch, Lou Malnati’s style! I topped it with spinach, mushrooms, garlic basil pesto, artichoke hearts, tofu ricotta, thick tomato sauce and crushed almonds for parmesan. The crust was aaaaalmost spot on to Lou’s and it didn’t collapse under the weight of toppings! The only thing that could’ve made it better would’ve been friends to share it with ):
"The idea that we have the right to inflict suffering and death on other sentient beings for the trivial reasons of palate pleasure and fashion is, without doubt, one of the most arrogant and morally repugnant notions in the history of human thought."
- Gary L. Francione (via headandstomachaches)
(Source: i---i, via angryvegan)
You know, I don’t even care if livestock were treated with care before they were slaughtered, milked, or had their eggs taken away. The fact is that you took from them. They don’t owe you anything. You don’t own them or their bodies.
Why is compassion and altruism so rare in a species that claims to be so intellectually evolved?
(via angryvegan)
Actually it happens a bit more like this.
"We humans take great pride in bragging about how easily we can write off an animal’s life if we like the way he or she tastes. We are living in a time when people actually pay money to be part of the audience at butchery competitions, and buy t-shirts emblazoned with the words “Meat is Murder… Tasty, Tasty Murder”. Have we ever been so proud to advertise our inability to empathize with other living beings?"
- They’re Bill and Lou written by Angel Flinn (via thevegancheese)
(Source: opinionatedcheese, via angryvegan)
"
What is meant by animal rights?
Every conscious being has interests that should be respected. No being who is conscious of being alive should be devalued to thinghood, dominated, used as a resource or a commodity. The crux of the idea known as animal rights is a movement to extend moral consideration to all conscious beings.
Nobody should have to demonstrate a specific level of intelligence to be accorded moral consideration. No one should have to be judged beautiful to be accorded moral consideration. No being should have to be useful to humanity or capable of accepting “duties” in order to be extended moral consideration. Indeed, what other animals need from us is being free from duties to us.
How is this different from animal welfare?
Traditionally, charities have worked on reducing the suffering of other animals that occurs when they are thought of as lesser beings who can and should be controlled.
There will always be suffering as long as any group is defined as available to be dominated and controlled. The nonhuman rights advocate does not dismiss people’s concerns about suffering. Those concerns are valid. But the concept of animal rights involved working at the root cause of the problem.
Regulating the methods of exploitation is unlikely to significantly improve the status of nonhuman animals. Indeed, by passing laws to regulate the way in which individuals are exploited, we harden into law the concept that humans have the right to use other conscious individuals as tools for research, as entertainment, as food, as so on.
So the rights advocate asks that we relinquish the idea that other animals can be bought, sold, and treated as things. This is not the same thing as asking for better treatment; the rights advocate demands something infinitely more valuable — freedom.
"
