I want honest opinions and no fighting.
If you want to fight - make your own thread.
I just saw something really interesting in a group of mine on FB.
Someone didn't let a Vegan into a group because they don't feed their cat meat and they felt it was actual animal abuse.
Now biologically we can confirm that with those teeth - they are meant to eat meat. That would be their natural state.
Ethically we understand how Vegans would feel about it.
But I'd love to hear how other people regard this.
Because I was really surprised by how vehemently most people felt?
My understanding was always that you could supplement for the missing nutrients (which might not be best practice - but would work).
I'm not going to put up a poll - that would be too simplistic.
And really I want to know what you all think. I'm curious. I mean it's funny in a way - to see Atheists fighting about this? (Yup it's an Athiests FB group - they're nutty there too).
And apparently the person had some other flaws that were known so that might have been part of the denial as well - so don't think they're just all mean. They really aren't.
But they're all people with long term illness and they don't deal well with people being "woo" in any way.
Addendum: The person was not already a group member - this was an application to enter the group - so no name was ever mentioned. It's a FB thing.
It was not the only marker that said they might cause conflict either. And the group is for folks with medical issues - who are there for support and education. Conflict isn't good for them. So weeding out someone with those markers might be necessary.