And I will portray today a believer who is offended in my feelings. Believers in the usefulness of food and that food is always ethical, if it does not violate the norms of law prescribed in the Criminal and Civil Codes.
And then, you know, it can be offensive against the background of tolerance and humanization of society.
Humanization of society is, of course, good. But, as for me, the humanization of society is when everyone has the opportunity to live comfortably and with high quality. Yes, yes, and eat well - including.
But everything turns out in a strange way. Humanization and the like go to extremes.
Just the other day I was handed their advertising magazine at the Magnit checkout. And there is a publication called Ethical Choice.
Of course, about vegan products.
And something really hurt me the title. Because if vegan products are an ethical choice, then everyone else is just NOT ethical. That is, all those who choose NOT to be vegan violate some kind of ethics (where are its rules spelled out, I wonder?).
It is understandable - the magazine tried to appear more advanced than it really is. Well, we got into a puddle, as all advanced people love to do here.
Telling all non-vegan buyers that they are making a NOT ethical choice.
True, in this case, the chain of stores sells NOT ethical products, and the magazine writes NOT ethical articles about NOT ethical food.
Although, in my opinion, however, it is unethical just such a selection of veganism.
Vegans have the right to eat whatever they choose. Meat eaters have the right to eat what they choose. Raw foodists are what they like. Hare Krishnas have the right to their gastronomic preferences and culinary traditions, Christians to theirs, Jews to theirs, Muslims to theirs.
And no one has the right to declare: this is an ethical choice, thereby informing that everything else falls outside the framework of ethics.
What do you think?