this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2023
89 points (83.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43984 readers
789 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes. They aren’t digesting meat, they are absorbing potassium and fixed nitrogen. The plant cells are, well, plant cells.

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If the plant is carnivorous are it's cells not the product of animal suffering?

[–] sizzler@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Nature's metal. We can't change that. However for the first time in history you have the opportunity to not eat the only companions we have in the universe.

[–] emptiestplace@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I am in awe. I've been vegan for 26 years, but this still caught me off guard. Simple, profound, brilliant. Thank you.

[–] sizzler@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] emptiestplace@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Well, that was a nice way to start the day ... thank you for sharing, though.

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That doesn't change how the plant made those cells though.

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, technically all plants are carnivorous. They all depend on soil which is organic matter made from all sorts of post-living organisms plants, bacteria, insects, and animals alike.

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Then some plants would still be more carnivorous than others. When I hear someone talking about how clearing land for food kills lots of animal, the typical response I see is that Vegans know this, but try to avoid animal suffering whenever possible because its simply not always possible. I think that line of reasoning could easily be used to say well why eat a fly trap when theres other plants that don't cause as much harm to animals. Imagine if everyone started eating flytraps then they would need to be mass farmed, and mass fed, and I'd imagine they'd look a lot less vegan in that situation.

[–] sizzler@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If we were involved in the process, say 1m Venus traps in a shed and fed flies bred specifically then that's not OK. But as its part of a natural plant process then it's still wierd but OK. I think, who am I to say? The vegan judge?

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Well the point of the post is to nit pick a hypothetical since I doubt many people, much less vegans are actually eating those plants, we're all casing judgement here. Especially since not everyone definition of veganism is the same. To me if its dietary and chemical then obviously it doesn't matter, but if the 'product of animal suffering' is someones black and white philosophy then to me Flytraps seem about as vegan as consuming the flies they eat (which is only like one month). While an insignificant amount, it is measurable is all I'm saying, literally a technicality but that's why its a basically hypothetical post online I suppose. In reality, everyone draws their own line somewhere, from the jainists who breath through cheese cloths to protect any microorganisms they can to the carnivours.