Natalie Portman wrote an interesting piece supporting veganism for The Huffington Post, a remarkably vegan-friendly mainstream media outlet. Below is a comment I pulled from the thread following Portman’s article that peaked my interest.

The commenter wrote:

We all have different tastes, outlooks, and reasons for eating our references. I don’t think one way is the absolute way. After all we may be a bunch of people, but each one of us are also our own individual. To question something like this is like saying the stranger next to me should do everything exactly like me…nothing more or less

There is an explicit, strong sense of individual liberty here, understood as the right to define your life as you choose and pursue it accordingly, that really permeates our political and social discourses as well. What conclusions can we reach if we really take this commenters proposition seriously? Scanning the vast array of different interests, lifestyles, opinions, and beliefs that seem to define highly individuated Western societies, we can pull out any number of examples to test our commitment to individuality.

Many, many people sexually prefer young children. There is something about a child that interests pedophiles. There are those who can only be satisfied if their sexual encounters involve high levels of aggression, force, and domination. Oftentimes, willing participants are lacking, so the next rational step in pursuit of satisfying the rapists individual preference is sex with the unwilling participant. Some people are of the opinion that ethnic minorities should not live in white communities, or attend white schools, or go to white churches. Some force and some legal discrimination is employed to achieve the desired outcome: living in a white world.

If we are sincere in our conviction that the pursuit of individuality ought to trump other ethical considerations, as the commenter seems to be arguing and a thought that most people strongly hold, these actions are necessarily acceptable. Unless we places limits on how far we can go in our pursuits there are problems.

The commenter recognizes this, and qualifies his/her position:

So should I condemn a person’s beliefs in eating? Or what they eat? If none of us are harming our fellow man, should we? Really?

If no harm is done to their neighbor, brother, or sister, then to each their own. Let them be.

(Who is this “fellow man”? As I mentioned above, many white people don’t see black people as their fellow man.)

We are free to pursue our individuality up to the point where we cause harm. That seems sensible, and I think most people just assume this limit when they espouse their belief in individuality. However, what the commenter doesn’t seem to understand is that this qualification contradicts his/her defense of killing and eating animals. The same is true for everybody else.

Animals can be harmed physically and emotionally and therefore these ethical limits extend beyond the human species. Veganism is healthy at all stages of the life course, so our consumption of animal flesh and their reproductive excrement’s falls into the category of “choice.” And that is when this limit, i.e., causing harm, becomes relevant.

The only rational conclusion is that going vegan is the right thing to do for this commenter, and everybody else.