tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7940836057223687203.post4627332104214245007..comments2019-11-25T21:12:43.953-05:00Comments on Society of Diana: TraditionSociety of Dianahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05647311220949944848noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7940836057223687203.post-14104323810686558842011-06-03T23:43:10.553-04:002011-06-03T23:43:10.553-04:00I agree. That's was what I was trying to expre...I agree. That's was what I was trying to express at the end of the post: My conflict between my current practice and my respect for the ancient one.Society of Dianahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05647311220949944848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7940836057223687203.post-50539874782255731212011-06-02T08:51:02.993-04:002011-06-02T08:51:02.993-04:00If this ritual really is 11,000 years old, that me...If this ritual really is 11,000 years old, that means it was probably instituted before the dawn of agriculture. If that's true, it puts an entirely different spin on the relation the people at the time had with the sea. The ability to make ethical and moral choices about our food sources is, after all, just another modern luxury. <br /><br />If the one and only option you had to ensure the survival of your village (read, your entire extended family, out to the third cousin) was to participate in an annual tuna harvest, the correct moral and ethical choice would be very different. In this context, allowing the tuna to survive would directly threaten the lives of everyone you knew.<br /><br />Not arguing against veganism, of course. Just pointing out that veganism only makes sense in an appropriate context... and that this practice makes perfect sense, too, in the presumed context of its origin.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com