Wilfred Crone's death was other old vegetarians ...

July 22, 2002

Thread head made me think of Wilfred Crone (author of 'Sunshine &

Shadow'), who was a fruitarian for donkey's years, but decided when

his faculties and independance started to fail to 'non-violently'

end his own life by walking in front of a train.

Maybe I've got that story wrong, but it seems that nobody in vegan

circles has ever questioned his actions...

But fact is a train driver friend of mine (veggie, not vegan) had to

take 3 months off of work with post traumatic stress due to somebody

comitting suicide by throwing themself in front of the train they

happened to be driving. I believe it is quite common amongst train

drivers to suffer no little amount of stress due to this cause (my

mother is a counsellor & backs this up BTW)

So how does this square as a 'non-violent' act???

Don't mean to demean the old codger or anything but it's a thought

that has troubled me...

Your thoughts?

Graham

July 22, 2002

quercusrobur2002 wrote:

>

> Thread head made me think of Wilfred Crone (author of 'Sunshine &

> Shadow'), who was a fruitarian for donkey's years, but decided when

> his faculties and independance started to fail to 'non-violently'

> end his own life by walking in front of a train.

>

> Maybe I've got that story wrong, but it seems that nobody in vegan

> circles has ever questioned his actions...

>

I'm not sufficiently well-informed to know of him. But I'd question his

actions, given half a chance.

Walking in front of a train is not a considerate way to kill yourself.

Neither for the train driver, nor for the people using public transport.

(Which we want to encourage, right?)

--

Ian McDonald

http://www.mcdonald.me.uk/

July 22, 2002

>...but decided when

>his faculties and independance started to fail to 'non-violently'

>end his own life by walking in front of a train.

I don't know the case you're talking about but I would certainly condemn it

as highly inconsiderate at best. Downright selfish more like.

There are ways of killing yourself that are very harmful to others (from

jumping from buildings where you have no control of your landing to simply

doing anything in public which can traumatize anyone who happens to look

your way at the wrong moment). One of the problems is that while

euthanasia is considered illegal, and suicide frowned upon, it does make it

difficult to find nicer' methods (for want of a better expression) which

are better for everyone. While people use the 'if they are going to do it

anyway at least make it safer' argument with giving condoms to kids, or in

arguing for drug liberalization, it is nearly always overlooked in the

suicide/euthanasia debate.

>But fact is a train driver friend of mine (veggie, not vegan) had to

>take 3 months off of work with post traumatic stress due to somebody

>comitting suicide by throwing themself in front of the train they

>happened to be driving.

My dad is a train driver and that he has been put in that same

situation. Not good.

Michael

July 22, 2002

Doesn't surprise me.

Whoever said vegans were consistent when it came to respecting life? Loads of them support abortion, euthanasia, etc, so they would think suicide was OK.

Just cos people are vegan, does not mean that many of them see the whole picture.

Wilfred Crone obviously didn't.

Lesley

quercusrobur2002 [grahamburnett]22 July 2002 01:31 Subject: Wilfred Crone's death was Re: other old vegetarians ...Thread head made me think of Wilfred Crone (author of 'Sunshine & Shadow'), who was a fruitarian for donkey's years, but decided when his faculties and independance started to fail to 'non-violently' end his own life by walking in front of a train.Maybe I've got that story wrong, but it seems that nobody in vegan circles has ever questioned his actions...But fact is a train driver friend of mine (veggie, not vegan) had to take 3 months off of work with post traumatic stress due to somebody comitting suicide by throwing themself in front of the train they happened to be driving. I believe it is quite common amongst train drivers to suffer no little amount of stress due to this cause (my mother is a counsellor & backs this up BTW)So how does this square as a 'non-violent' act???Don't mean to demean the old codger or anything but it's a thought that has troubled me...Your thoughts?GrahamTo send an email to -

July 22, 2002

The "if they are going to do it anyway make it safer" is a defeatist school of thought which has only ever made the problems worse. It has made more people use illegal drugs, more teenagers have sex early, abortions more common, etc, get the picture?

I'm sure if Wilfred Crone wanted to end his life, I'm sure he could have found a way that would not have been so traumatic to others, with just a little thought, regardless of legal issues.

I believe that the vegan community should make special provision to take care of elderly vegans, and there are several special places for elderly vegans and vegetarians to end their days when they need looking after, Homes for Elderly Vegetarians. Still there may be some elderly vegans in homes where they are not respected as vegans, maybe Wilfred Crone was fearful that he would end up somewhere where he was not respected.

I cannot support what Wilfired Crone did, either to himself or the train driver.

But I believe that these things are more likely to happen when the vegan community does not stick together well enough to help those in need.

Lesley

Mavreela [nec.lists]22 July 2002 10:29 Subject: Re: Wilfred Crone's death was Re: other old vegetarians ...>...but decided when>his faculties and independance started to fail to 'non-violently'>end his own life by walking in front of a train.I don't know the case you're talking about but I would certainly condemn it as highly inconsiderate at best. Downright selfish more like.There are ways of killing yourself that are very harmful to others (from jumping from buildings where you have no control of your landing to simply doing anything in public which can traumatize anyone who happens to look your way at the wrong moment). One of the problems is that while euthanasia is considered illegal, and suicide frowned upon, it does make it difficult to find nicer' methods (for want of a better expression) which are better for everyone. While people use the 'if they are going to do it anyway at least make it safer' argument with giving condoms to kids, or in arguing for drug liberalization, it is nearly always overlooked in the suicide/euthanasia debate.>But fact is a train driver friend of mine (veggie, not vegan) had to>take 3 months off of work with post traumatic stress due to somebody>comitting suicide by throwing themself in front of the train they>happened to be driving.My dad is a train driver and that he has been put in that same situation. Not good.MichaelTo send an email to -

July 22, 2002

>The " if they are going to do it anyway make it safer " is a defeatist

>school of thought which has only ever made the problems worse. It has made

>more people use illegal drugs, more teenagers have sex early, abortions

>more common, etc,

Debatable. It's all chicken and egg and very difficult to prove.

To make the question relevant to this list - if you are not going to be

able to turn people vegan overnight do you bring in standards to cut the

cruelty in meat production because it is better than not having them, or do

you consider that a violation of principles? It's all a question of

pragmatism. There is no right answer and anyone who claims to have one is

wrong.

>get the picture?

Eh? What does that mean?

>I'm sure if Wilfred Crone wanted to end his life, I'm sure he could have

>found a way that would not have been so traumatic to others, with just a

>little thought, regardless of legal issues.

Completely agree. Said so.

>But I believe that these things are more likely to happen when the vegan

>community does not stick together well enough to help those in need.

Can't speak for Wilfred, never heard of him before, but I believe that you

are forcing you opinion and attitude to life onto everyone else.

Some people would rather go out on top rather than wither away. It's not a

question of support, just a different attitude to life.

Michael

July 22, 2002

Nope, I do not think those things are so difficult to prove, especially in the case of abortion as the rate has risen almost steadily since it became legal. Not sure about the other situations. Usually making something legal (or taking a softly softly approach as with drugs), is what makes it more accepted and more common.

Those who prefer Wilfred's way are possibly undermining the efforts of those who want to build care and support for elderly vegans.

Do you think of the possibility that Wilfred, by his suicide, might have made other elderly vegans or fruitarians feel that they perhaps also had a duty not to be a burden on the younger generation?

I find that worrying, and indeed in order to reassure elderly and otherwise in need vegans, the vegan community needed to be more vocal in condemning his actions and reassuring other older vegans that their needs would not be forgotten. I believe it is 99% a question of support, just as lack of support forces women into abortion, it forces elderly people to want to end their lives.

I have read Vegan Views for years and certainly recall the news of Wilfred Crone's death a few years ago.

Does anyone know if he had any family who would have seen to it that he would be looked after properly once he became more in need of help?

Lesley

Mavreela [nec.lists]22 July 2002 11:12 Subject: RE: Wilfred Crone's death was Re: other old vegetarians ...

>The "if they are going to do it anyway make it safer" is a defeatist >school of thought which has only ever made the problems worse. It has made >more people use illegal drugs, more teenagers have sex early, abortions >more common, etc,Debatable. It's all chicken and egg and very difficult to prove.To make the question relevant to this list - if you are not going to be able to turn people vegan overnight do you bring in standards to cut the cruelty in meat production because it is better than not having them, or do you consider that a violation of principles? It's all a question of pragmatism. There is no right answer and anyone who claims to have one is wrong.>get the picture?Eh? What does that mean?>I'm sure if Wilfred Crone wanted to end his life, I'm sure he could have >found a way that would not have been so traumatic to others, with just a >little thought, regardless of legal issues.Completely agree. Said so.>But I believe that these things are more likely to happen when the vegan >community does not stick together well enough to help those in need.Can't speak for Wilfred, never heard of him before, but I believe that you are forcing you opinion and attitude to life onto everyone else.Some people would rather go out on top rather than wither away. It's not a question of support, just a different attitude to life.MichaelTo send an email to -

July 22, 2002

>Nope, I do not think those things are so difficult to prove, especially in

>the case of abortion as the rate has risen almost steadily since it became

>legal. Not sure about the other situations. Usually making something legal

>(or taking a softly softly approach as with drugs), is what makes it more

>accepted and more common.

Or is the rise in something the result of the same reasons that saw

whatever measures brought in? Society changes and there is no way you can

make a definite claim about what came first.

Is there so much underage sex because of freely available contraceptives,

or is it because of societal changes which would see far more teen

pregnancies but for freely available contraceptives. Nothing is isolated

from it's context, and that can't be charted so easily.

As for abortion, I don't doubt the connection there, but that's because the

logic of the argument doesn't work. The question is would people be as

promiscuous if abortion was not legal, or would there be more abandoned

unwanted babies?

>Those who prefer Wilfred's way are possibly undermining the efforts of

>those who want to build care and support for elderly vegans.

So that justifies undermining someone like Wilfred?

>Do you think of the possibility that Wilfred, by his suicide, might have

>made other elderly vegans or fruitarians feel that they perhaps also had a

>duty not to be a burden on the younger generation?

So you are saying Wilfred should be forced to live a life he does not want

just for the sake of others? Do you think the other elderly vegans and

fruitarians have any right to say how Wilfred should live his life?

Personally if the other fruitarians think about any duties they have then

that is a good thing? If people did that more they could try to ensure

they are not a burden, and so live their lives as they wish free from any

such worry, or maybe the family can agree that they have responsibility to

look after their parents, just as they did for their children? Why does an

issue being raised automatically lead to the conclusion that they are a burden?

I think people should be forced to think about others if they do

not. Maybe I'm just radical, but then I'm not a egoist.

>...in order to reassure elderly and otherwise in need vegans, the vegan

>community needed to be more vocal in condemning his actions

The vegan community is a collection of disparate voices, representing

disparate opinions and should not speak out for anything beyond it's core

issues (and even they are open to dispute).

>...and reassuring other older vegans that their needs would not be forgotten.

Well if you had your way other people's needs would apparently be forgotten.

Michael

July 22, 2002

You've lost me here, whose needs would be forgotten if I had my way?

I consider the vegan community to collectively have duties to its own people that family normally have to one another.

Maybe that makes me pretty radical in my thoughts on what the vegan community needs to be. We should all consider our duties.

If there was an elderly frail vegan near to me that I knew of I would try to help.

Actually there was one elderly vegan in my area a year or so ago who I heard had a stroke, but she had two daughters to look after her and I did offer a time or two to be of some help but never heard back from them.

This debate should probably have been done in Vegan Views or the Vegan before poor Wilfred topped himself. Who knows he might have changed his mind if he thought anyone cared.

Lesley

Mavreela [nec.lists]22 July 2002 12:56 Subject: RE: Wilfred Crone's death was Re: other old vegetarians ...>Nope, I do not think those things are so difficult to prove, especially in >the case of abortion as the rate has risen almost steadily since it became >legal. Not sure about the other situations. Usually making something legal >(or taking a softly softly approach as with drugs), is what makes it more >accepted and more common.Or is the rise in something the result of the same reasons that saw whatever measures brought in? Society changes and there is no way you can make a definite claim about what came first.Is there so much underage sex because of freely available contraceptives, or is it because of societal changes which would see far more teen pregnancies but for freely available contraceptives. Nothing is isolated from it's context, and that can't be charted so easily.As for abortion, I don't doubt the connection there, but that's because the logic of the argument doesn't work. The question is would people be as promiscuous if abortion was not legal, or would there be more abandoned unwanted babies?>Those who prefer Wilfred's way are possibly undermining the efforts of >those who want to build care and support for elderly vegans.So that justifies undermining someone like Wilfred?>Do you think of the possibility that Wilfred, by his suicide, might have >made other elderly vegans or fruitarians feel that they perhaps also had a >duty not to be a burden on the younger generation?So you are saying Wilfred should be forced to live a life he does not want just for the sake of others? Do you think the other elderly vegans and fruitarians have any right to say how Wilfred should live his life?Personally if the other fruitarians think about any duties they have then that is a good thing? If people did that more they could try to ensure they are not a burden, and so live their lives as they wish free from any such worry, or maybe the family can agree that they have responsibility to look after their parents, just as they did for their children? Why does an issue being raised automatically lead to the conclusion that they are a burden?I think people should be forced to think about others if they do not. Maybe I'm just radical, but then I'm not a egoist.>...in order to reassure elderly and otherwise in need vegans, the vegan >community needed to be more vocal in condemning his actionsThe vegan community is a collection of disparate voices, representing disparate opinions and should not speak out for anything beyond it's core issues (and even they are open to dispute).>...and reassuring other older vegans that their needs would not be forgotten.Well if you had your way other people's needs would apparently be forgotten.MichaelTo send an email to -

July 22, 2002

I can back you up about train drivers. My dad worked on the railroad for

nearly thirty years (hauling coal mostly). Two times he was in a train that hit

someone. They can't help it, can't slow the train down in time. He had to

i.d. the one of the guys for legal purposes. Though there wasn't much to see.

He never talked about it much, and had to take some time off. I know it bothers

him to this day. People who want to commit suicide have no right to do that to

someone, IMO.

Hannah

quercusrobur2002

7/21/2002 8:31 PM

Wilfred Crone's death was Re: other old vegetarians ...

Thread head made me think of Wilfred Crone (author of 'Sunshine &

Shadow'), who was a fruitarian for donkey's years, but decided when

his faculties and independance started to fail to 'non-violently'

end his own life by walking in front of a train.

Maybe I've got that story wrong, but it seems that nobody in vegan

circles has ever questioned his actions...

But fact is a train driver friend of mine (veggie, not vegan) had to

take 3 months off of work with post traumatic stress due to somebody

comitting suicide by throwing themself in front of the train they

happened to be driving. I believe it is quite common amongst train

drivers to suffer no little amount of stress due to this cause (my

mother is a counsellor & backs this up BTW)

So how does this square as a 'non-violent' act???

Don't mean to demean the old codger or anything but it's a thought

that has troubled me...

Your thoughts?

Graham

July 22, 2002

>You've lost me here, whose needs would be forgotten if I had my way?

Those who would rather die. Those who you are denying the option from lest

it makes others feel that they are a burden. Those.

>I consider the vegan community to collectively have duties to its own

>people that family normally have to one another.

But I don't think my family should have any right to tell me what to do

with my life, or how I should live it.

>Maybe that makes me pretty radical in my thoughts on what the vegan

>community needs to be.

It all goes back to the " if that's how you wish to define vegan then I'm

not one of them " position. By all means have your own community of people

based on shared beliefs which includes veganism, just make up your own name

for it, as did the Vegan Society way back.

The more baggage you add to being something, the more people you exclude.

So far this month I have failed to be a vegan on Brad's criteria, and now

on your criteria.

>We should all consider our duties. If there was an elderly frail vegan

>near to me that I knew of I would try to help.

Yes. Good. No arguments there.

>This debate should probably have been done in Vegan Views or the Vegan

>before poor Wilfred topped himself. Who knows he might have changed his

>mind if he thought anyone cared.

Must emphasis that I don't know anything about Wilfred Crone, and there

doesn't appear to be 'owt online. I'm only talking in the general sense.

Michael

July 22, 2002

I never said you failed as a vegan, not sure where you get that idea from.

As vegans living in a non-vegan, and very often vegan-unfriendly, world it is in all our interests to build a wide variety of support, old people's homes being part of that. Non-vegans aren't going to do it for us so we vegans have to build all this, it's frustrating to have to send kids to a school run by animal-eaters too. I wouldn't know how to home-educate, so I feel school is necessary, but you would think that just as different religious groups have their own schools, it would be possible for vegetarians (even if there were not enough vegans) to have got together by now and set up their own schools.

Trouble is too many of the veggie/vegan community are obsessed with integration with animal eaters, instead of concentrating on serving their own people by building veggie and vegan institutions for education, care and support.

Lesley

Mavreela [nec.lists]22 July 2002 16:58 Subject: RE: Wilfred Crone's death was Re: other old vegetarians ...>You've lost me here, whose needs would be forgotten if I had my way?Those who would rather die. Those who you are denying the option from lest it makes others feel that they are a burden. Those.>I consider the vegan community to collectively have duties to its own >people that family normally have to one another.But I don't think my family should have any right to tell me what to do with my life, or how I should live it.>Maybe that makes me pretty radical in my thoughts on what the vegan >community needs to be.It all goes back to the "if that's how you wish to define vegan then I'm not one of them" position. By all means have your own community of people based on shared beliefs which includes veganism, just make up your own name for it, as did the Vegan Society way back.The more baggage you add to being something, the more people you exclude.So far this month I have failed to be a vegan on Brad's criteria, and now on your criteria.>We should all consider our duties. If there was an elderly frail vegan >near to me that I knew of I would try to help.Yes. Good. No arguments there.>This debate should probably have been done in Vegan Views or the Vegan >before poor Wilfred topped himself. Who knows he might have changed his >mind if he thought anyone cared.Must emphasis that I don't know anything about Wilfred Crone, and there doesn't appear to be 'owt online. I'm only talking in the general sense.MichaelTo send an email to -

July 22, 2002

Hi Lesley

I don't wish to get drawn into a debate on abortion, because from past experience they are destructive to any list on which they appear, but I will just make one comment....

> Nope, I do not think those things are so difficult to prove, especially in the case of abortion as the rate has risen almost steadily

> since it became legal.

The lowest recorded crime figures in the UK occurred in 1922 when the police went on strike. The fact the police went on strike did not reduce the amount of crime - just the amount of *reports* of crime.

BB

Peter

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 10/07/02

July 22, 2002

Hi Hannah, Lesley, Michael (and anyone else - I've lost track a bit...)

> People who want to commit suicide have no right to do that to someone,

IMO.

I agree with you all on this. If people want to commit suicide, what's wrong

with the age old concept of taking an overdose? Or, even better, how native

Americans do it - wander off into the wilderness.

BB

Peter

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 10/07/02

July 22, 2002

Graham

I agree totally with your point. It is entirely unfair on the poor train

driver.

Jo

> Thread head made me think of Wilfred Crone (author of 'Sunshine &

> Shadow'), who was a fruitarian for donkey's years, but decided when

> his faculties and independance started to fail to 'non-violently'

> end his own life by walking in front of a train.

>

> Maybe I've got that story wrong, but it seems that nobody in vegan

> circles has ever questioned his actions...

>

> But fact is a train driver friend of mine (veggie, not vegan) had to

> take 3 months off of work with post traumatic stress due to somebody

> comitting suicide by throwing themself in front of the train they

> happened to be driving. I believe it is quite common amongst train

> drivers to suffer no little amount of stress due to this cause (my

> mother is a counsellor & backs this up BTW)

>

> So how does this square as a 'non-violent' act???

>

> Don't mean to demean the old codger or anything but it's a thought

> that has troubled me...

>

> Your thoughts?

>

> Graham

>

> To send an email to -

>

July 22, 2002

Lesley

Maybe people's 'whole pictures' are different.

Jo

Doesn't surprise me.

Whoever said vegans were consistent when it came to respecting life? Loads of them support abortion, euthanasia, etc, so they would think suicide was OK.

Just cos people are vegan, does not mean that many of them see the whole picture.

Wilfred Crone obviously didn't.

Lesley

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 10/07/02

July 22, 2002

>I consider the vegan community to collectively have duties to its own people that family normally have to one another.

I don't see any evidence of 'vegan community'. Family ties are obvious, and presumably apply whether the whole family is vegan or not! It could be that if you feel responsibility to the vegan community you could help a vegan who has done things you disagree with, like living a life of debauchery or having an abortion. I do not see that being vegan makes a person perfect, or necessarily any more deserving of help than anyone else. I also think that people will help others of their own choice, and cannot be made to feel guilty if their choice is different to yours.

Jo

>Maybe that makes me pretty radical in my thoughts on what the vegan community needs to be. We should all consider our duties.

If there was an elderly frail vegan near to me that I knew of I would try to help.

Actually there was one elderly vegan in my area a year or so ago who I heard had a stroke, but she had two daughters to look after her and I did offer a time or two to be of some help but never heard back from them.

This debate should probably have been done in Vegan Views or the Vegan before poor Wilfred topped himself. Who knows he might have changed his mind if he thought anyone cared.

Lesley

Mavreela [nec.lists]22 July 2002 12:56 Subject: RE: Wilfred Crone's death was Re: other old vegetarians ...>Nope, I do not think those things are so difficult to prove, especially in >the case of abortion as the rate has risen almost steadily since it became >legal. Not sure about the other situations. Usually making something legal >(or taking a softly softly approach as with drugs), is what makes it more >accepted and more common.Or is the rise in something the result of the same reasons that saw whatever measures brought in? Society changes and there is no way you can make a definite claim about what came first.Is there so much underage sex because of freely available contraceptives, or is it because of societal changes which would see far more teen pregnancies but for freely available contraceptives. Nothing is isolated from it's context, and that can't be charted so easily.As for abortion, I don't doubt the connection there, but that's because the logic of the argument doesn't work. The question is would people be as promiscuous if abortion was not legal, or would there be more abandoned unwanted babies?>Those who prefer Wilfred's way are possibly undermining the efforts of >those who want to build care and support for elderly vegans.So that justifies undermining someone like Wilfred?>Do you think of the possibility that Wilfred, by his suicide, might have >made other elderly vegans or fruitarians feel that they perhaps also had a >duty not to be a burden on the younger generation?So you are saying Wilfred should be forced to live a life he does not want just for the sake of others? Do you think the other elderly vegans and fruitarians have any right to say how Wilfred should live his life?Personally if the other fruitarians think about any duties they have then that is a good thing? If people did that more they could try to ensure they are not a burden, and so live their lives as they wish free from any such worry, or maybe the family can agree that they have responsibility to look after their parents, just as they did for their children? Why does an issue being raised automatically lead to the conclusion that they are a burden?I think people should be forced to think about others if they do not. Maybe I'm just radical, but then I'm not a egoist.>...in order to reassure elderly and otherwise in need vegans, the vegan >community needed to be more vocal in condemning his actionsThe vegan community is a collection of disparate voices, representing disparate opinions and should not speak out for anything beyond it's core issues (and even they are open to dispute).>...and reassuring other older vegans that their needs would not be forgotten.Well if you had your way other people's needs would apparently be forgotten.MichaelTo send an email to -

July 22, 2002

> I consider the vegan community to collectively have duties to its own people that family normally have to one another.

Hey, folks, Lesley has a point here. I remember when I was initiated as a vegan - after rolling up my trouser leg and bearing my breast, I was led to the Worshipful Master with a cord around my neck and a sword at my breast. I then took an oath to always look after fellow vegans as though they were brothers. After that I was then given the secret words and signs which I could use to recognise other vegans - particularly when they are in distress....

Oh, sorry - wrong list ;-)

BB

Peter

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 10/07/02

July 22, 2002

Lesley

>it's frustrating to have to send kids to a school run by animal-eaters too. I wouldn't know how to home-educate, so I feel school is >necessary, but you would think that just as different religious groups have their own schools, it would be possible for vegetarians >>(even if there were not enough vegans) to have got together by now and set up their own schools.

I would be more worried about segregating my children from the rest of the world. The vegan population is so small that it would be too limiting to stay totally within it. And if we do not mix how are we ever to make a good impression and have a chance to show other people that our lifestyle could be acceptable to them. I see little point in making ourselves seem stand-offish.

>Trouble is too many of the veggie/vegan community are obsessed with integration with animal eaters, instead of concentrating >on serving their own people by building veggie and vegan institutions for education, care and support.

Obviously not everyone agrees with you on the need to keep separate. If we are to concentrate on helping our own - does that mean we should only help people of the same race, or religion, or sexual orientation, as well as their eating habits?

Jo

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 10/07/02

July 22, 2002

Lesley

> it's frustrating to have to send kids to a school run by animal-eaters too.

> Trouble is too many of the veggie/vegan community are obsessed with integration with animal eaters, instead of concentrating on

> serving their own people by building veggie and vegan institutions for education, care and support.

I really find this way of thinking very frightening. I can see it leading ultimately to only one place - apartheid and concentration camps. If a group of people decide to set themselves apart from everyone else in society, then it can only go one of two ways - the group will either be the persecutors or the persecuted.

Personally, I don't want a society run along the lines of white-dominated South Africa or Nazi Germany. I am very happy to integrate with those who are different. I guess that means in a world of vegan-led oppression, I would have to be locked up too, as I would be a danger to the regime.

How, exactly, do you suppose we could create an air of understanding with people who we look down on and refuse to talk to?

"First they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew....

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist....

Then they came for the communists, and I did not speak out because I was not a communist....

Then they came for me, and there was nobody left to speak out for me." Martin Neimoller

BB

Peter

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 10/07/02

July 22, 2002

Scoff all you like, but I'd still rather look after (and be helped by) my fellow vegans than just anyone, or even most of my relatives (eg my dairy farming cousin). I feel more like vegans are my family than people like him, where there is no reason to feel any bond.

Lesley

Peter [snowbow]22 July 2002 18:39 Subject: Re: Wilfred Crone's death was Re: other old vegetarians ...

> I consider the vegan community to collectively have duties to its own people that family normally have to one another.

Hey, folks, Lesley has a point here. I remember when I was initiated as a vegan - after rolling up my trouser leg and bearing my breast, I was led to the Worshipful Master with a cord around my neck and a sword at my breast. I then took an oath to always look after fellow vegans as though they were brothers. After that I was then given the secret words and signs which I could use to recognise other vegans - particularly when they are in distress....

Oh, sorry - wrong list ;-)

BB

Peter

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 10/07/02To send an email to -

July 22, 2002

but these problems occur throughout the whole community. Why would we think about helping only one section.

Jo

For me the whole picture is about reverence for life, human as well as animal, it's also about supporting others in the community to facilitate a culture of respect for life (supporting one another and so preventing the desperation and fear that leads to abortion/suicide/euthanasia). I thought that would be the case for many vegans, most Ethical Vegans anyway.

Lesley

Heartwork [Heartwork]22 July 2002 18:20 Subject: Re: Wilfred Crone's death was Re: other old vegetarians ...

Lesley

Maybe people's 'whole pictures' are different.

Jo

Doesn't surprise me.

Whoever said vegans were consistent when it came to respecting life? Loads of them support abortion, euthanasia, etc, so they would think suicide was OK.

Just cos people are vegan, does not mean that many of them see the whole picture.

Wilfred Crone obviously didn't.

Lesley

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 10/07/02To send an email to -

July 22, 2002

Some of us who have kids want somewhere safe where they will not be oppressed as a minority. Mine have not suffered any problems so far over us being vegan, but I have heard of vegan kids getting teased.

You don't have kids, maybe if you do someday you will understand the need for a strong veggie/vegan community for them to feel they belong to, a community of like-minded people where you know there will be someone suitable to take them in if you and their other parent die young too.

Lesley

Peter [snowbow]22 July 2002 20:09 Subject: Re: Wilfred Crone's death was Re: other old vegetarians ...