Elroy Willis wrote:

A little, maybe, especially if it was a young bunny. But nobody has
ever claimed the food chain is "humane," have they? The idea of
the lions laying with the lambs in peace, and no death taking place
in the world is just a fantasy for the overly-emotional people who
can't stand the sight or thought of anything dying.

It really comes down to respecting the rights and feelings of fellow
sentient beings; just as we hold some human rights as unalienable, I
believe that other living, feeling creatures deserve something of the
same. If other sentient beings want to kill each other, then that's
their right. Now, to get to the point. Would you agree that
intentionally and needlessly causing suffering and bringing death upon
other beings that possess both the ability to feel pain and fear death
is morally indefensible? Well, I do, and I also believe that most
animals possess these traits to at least some degree. That's largely
why I am vegan. Being an atheist as well, and thus believing that life
is short, I also hold life as something that should be highly valued
and respected while it lasts. There's another reason for why I disagree
with how animals are often treated as commodities. I'll discuss the
fear/pain issue in more detail below.

Do you eat eggs? If not, why not? If so, how do you justify it?

I am vegan, so I do not eat eggs. In this area, my reasons have as much
to do with health as with ethics, and thus I would not push them on
others. I mean, it does seem sort of mean to steal and eat a hen's
unborn children, but I'm not sure how much that really upsets the
affected hen. Thus, I'd rather not get into this.
I'm not really trying to convince anyone else with this--to be honest,
I don't really care much what other people eat. You asked though, and
since I'm nice, I tried to answer. Feel free to point out any errors
within my arguments.

Elroy Willis wrote:

A little, maybe, especially if it was a young bunny. But nobody has
ever claimed the food chain is "humane," have they? The idea of
the lions laying with the lambs in peace, and no death taking place
in the world is just a fantasy for the overly-emotional people who
can't stand the sight or thought of anything dying.

I'm going to start out saying that ethics and philosophy are not my
specialties, so this is going to get a bit convoluted. Okay, my reasons
have more to do with principle than emotion. The food chain, as it
regards non-human entities is irrelevant unless humans have somehow
disturbed it in such a way as to cause great harm (like what the cats
are doing in Australia). I just wanted to get that across--thus, the
bloody death of the bunny, while sad, had no bearing on the principles
I hold to as a vegan.

It really comes down to respecting the rights and feelings of fellow
sentient beings; just as we hold some human rights as unalienable, I
believe that other living, feeling creatures deserve something of the
same. If other sentient beings want to kill each other, then that's
their right. Now, to get to the point. Would you agree that
intentionally and needlessly causing suffering and bringing death upon
other beings that possess both the ability to feel pain and fear death
is morally indefensible? Well, I do, and I also believe that most
animals possess these traits to at least some degree. That's largely
why I am vegan. Being an atheist as well, and thus believing that life
is short, I also hold life as something that should be highly valued
and respected while it lasts. There's another reason for why I disagree
with how animals are often treated as commodities. I'll discuss the
fear/pain issue in more detail below.

Pretty much. I'm curious if you like the smell of BBQ, though. Do
you like it or does it make you sick?

I wasn't born vegan, so I can still appreciate the smell of animal
products. Generally speaking, though, I no longer have much desire to
partake.

You need to define "sentient" in order to keep going, don't you?

Well, according to dictionary.com it can be either of two things:
1. Having sense perception; conscious: "The living knew themselves
just sentient puppets on God's stage" (T.E. Lawrence).
2. Experiencing sensation or feeling.

For me, it's enough if a creature can (as above) 1.) feel pain, and 2.)
fear death. If you think about it, most of the functions that are
necessary to support life--most basally, reproducing and eating--are,
at least in humans, reinforced by positive feelings. I.E. eating,
especially when you are hungry, feels good. Sex feels good. It would
seem logical that the system works similarly in other animals.
Otherwise, a given animal would not eat, and would die, and would not
reproduce, in which case it would go extinct. The only thing really
separating us is the complexity of our thought process. I doubt that
most animals are really capable of looking far beyond the base
necessities requisite to keeping themselves and their kin alive. Still,
gorillas were capable of learning and conversing in sign language. As
humans, we excelled above the rest because we learned to master our
environment, but are we really as advanced as we'd like to think?
Personally, I don't know for sure, but until I do I'd rather not take
the chance. And, if you believe in random selection, it would seem
statistically unlikely that we really are so much more advanced than
our fellows.

Do earthworms and beetles and locusts qualify? What about mice and
rats and squirrels? Where does "sentience" start in the food chain,
in your opinion?

You swat at a fly, and he'll quickly dart away. Perhaps this is an
expression of fear of death? Then, a second later, he'll land again,
right where he was before you tried to swat at him. My hypothesis is
that sentience can be measured in quantity, as compared to it simply
being a condition--the foundation for this belief is in the above
paragraph. In this case, I'd say that the fly doesn't have much. On the
other hand, if you abuse your dog, he'll quickly learn to fear you. I
once had a gerbil when I was a toddler. Later, a cat was introduced to
the house. The two did not get along, and eventually the gerbil learned
to hide under his rock whenever the cat entered the room in which his
enclosure was located. I don't think you can say that sentience
necessarily starts anywhere in the food chain, because the food chain
is not linear. Even the tree-branch image that biologists often use to
try and represent evolution to the unwashed masses is not really
correct. So, instead of trying to decide whether each particular
species is or is not too sentient for consumption, I just throw all
animal-kind into a group.

It's certainly something to think about. I suspect if I were actually
starving to death, I'd probably eat another dead human, but I wouldn't
like it, I'd just do it in order to survive. My survival instincts
would probably override my disgust, I think, but I can't be completely
sure.

If the creature/person was already dead, then there wouldn't really be
any wrong done in eating it/him/her, I suppose.

Do you eat eggs? If not, why not? If so, how do you justify it?

I am vegan, so I do not eat eggs. In this area, my reasons have as much
to do with health as with ethics, and thus I would not push them on
others. I mean, it does seem sort of mean to steal and eat a hen's
unborn children, but I'm not sure how much that really upsets the
affected hen. Thus, I'd rather not get into this.

I'm not really trying to convince anyone else with this--to be honest,
I don't really care much what other people eat. You asked though, and
since I'm nice, I tried to answer. Feel free to point out any errors
within my arguments.