Most people would never in a million years think that vegans would cause an ecological disaster. Vegans the world over would most likely protest very loudly at the mere thought that they could be responsible for such a thing. However it is TRUE. Before you go off on me and my “radical” ideas, keep a few things in mind. I actually DO believe in world peace, plenty of food for all, happiness for all, as well as truth and justice.

Now on to the meat (he he) of my argument. Vegans and other animal activists would have every person on the planet stop killing animals, stop eating meat, and cease keeping pets. I’m sure everyone can agree that these things are true, correct? This is the basis of my hypothesis that vegans want an ecological disaster to occur.

What would happen if all those things became true? What if nobody killed animals for any reason? What if we stopped eating meat even from animals who died of natural causes? And what if we actually didn’t keep pets anymore? What would the consequences of these things be? Think about it for a minute or two, and lets see if you come to the same earth shattering conclusions that I did.

No more keeping animals in captivity (pets) = set them all free.

All the animals in the world suddenly free = overpopulation of the free animals.

Overpopulation of free animals = vegetation depleted by a significant amount, property destruction, loss of human life, increase in pollution.

These things are a natural progression of freeing all the animals currently in captivity. I include zoos, ranches, house pets and any other methods or means of keeping animals under control in any way for this hypothesis. Herbivores left to their own devices often travel in herds and can and will eat all vegetation in their path. Try to imagine a herd of 1000 freed cows coming across a corn farm. Animals in captivity are not all friendly either, this would include predatory animals and other dangerous animals. Imagine a pride of lions hunting the corn farm which is being eaten by the herd of cows. Many of these animals would cause loss of human life either directly (predator attack), or indirectly (stampede or loss of resources). Pollution would occur because we can no longer eat animal flesh. Animals die and their corpses rot and get into the water table, record numbers of flies would spread disease, and bloated corpses give off toxic gasses.

So suppose you let the government or other agencies take care of the dying or dead animals which aren’t eaten by predators or scavengers. They would most likely have to gather them up and burn them (since we don’t eat them anymore). This would concentrate the pollution caused by corpses and consume enormous amounts of resources.

Anything else I forgot? Maybe something I got wrong? Feel free to educate me, but do NOT make assumptions.

dracoselene

I'm an artist, writer, ordained interfaith minister, veteran, spiritualist, androgyne, and piles of other labels that never seem to fit. I'm following my passion and attempting to make myself and the world a better place. I think that through compassion and understanding we can all become one unified race of human beings, and life is better when you remember to play.