Here in Toronto, being a vegetarian is akin to wearing of a badge of honour: it grants the practitioner a distinct upper rung in the echelons of morality. Who would dare question the inherent righteousness of such a choice? Obviously, many, but the latest is the New York Times, which has just pointed out that, hey, plants don’t like being chopped up, cooked and eaten any more than other, cuter animals do.
Consider, the Times suggests, the many signs that plants don’t want to be eaten: thorns, poisons and a myriad of other defense mechanisms are all intent on keeping predators at bay. When a plant is wounded, apparently, it releases volatile chemicals and goes into defense mode. “Just like a chicken running around without its head,” the article continues, “the body of a corn plant torn from the soil or sliced into pieces struggles to save itself.” Suffering, it seems, is just part of the eating process.
This argument, of course, addresses only one so-called benefit of vegetarianism – that it lessens the suffering of the creatures being eaten. We would just like to point out that some have been known to foray into vegetarianism for other reasons, like the environment, maybe, or health.
And while the NYT does have a point, we just hope this mode of thought doesn’t usher in a new era of Nothing-tarianism.