/lit/ - Literature

>>14106831
Gee, props for the comradery anon.

To the points:

Societal perception: What onus rests on the individual to change societal perceptions on their own? Besides, surely morality as conceived by society can (and should) be at odds with the individuals morality. An introspective individual leading an examined life will likely come to subtler moral conclusions than most, and history provides us with plenty of examples were what was taken to be moral by the group was exactly the opposite. Here is something you can do as an individual to directly reduce your moral complicity: eat vegan.

BUT I do think that individuals can impact social perceptions, and they can do so by making a change to a vegan diet. Presumably you will interact people, be forced into explaining some of the reasons why you don't eat meat or dairy, and in doing so you build public consciousness. Actually, I think many more people are capable of the empathic leap to understanding the brutality of animal slaughter, and the rest, that is the uncaring or unreflective majority whose morality tracks social perception, will lumber after. If you really are committed you can actively protest for animal rights (though I think this tactic often has pretty bad optics, at least in the way its practiced, though I think protest is a strong tool in general).

As for the religion argument, I can't find it in your previous post, could you point me to it?