I personally separate accidental death and intentional death/exploitation just like I don't want to kill any ants but if I am driving I can presume that some might be run over which is different then wanting and trying to kill them.
but how can you make a moral distinction between killing the inhabitants of a land to use it to grow corn and stealing the food from the inhabitants of a land causing them to die.
Murder is murder. The insects dont care why they are being killed.
It's not all a numbers thing and intentions play a large part of moral decisions, just like a moral distinction is made between manslaughter and homicide by misadventure.
but to use my example, how would you answer.
Apply it to native indians to make it easier. Would it be better to slaughter them outright or take their food and let them starve? How could you say either is the moral high ground?
That analogy is exaggerating my original point on intentions, are you also saying that you believe exploiting or slaughtering animals is morally the same as if some were unintentionally killed by plant processing or even walking? If so you are implying there is no point in being vegan if murder is just murder whether that be the slaughter of animals for meat or the killing of insects unintentionally because of plant harvesting?
I agree. there is no point being vegan if you believe insects deserve the same consideration as animals. There is no point in avoiding honey if you dont give other insects the same consideration.
Yes the first part of the analogy was an exaggeration because bees dont die when you take their food. But other insects die when you take their land and poison them to make things like maple syrup (a vegan alternative). But I am suppose to believe (due to veganism) that the latter is the moral high ground.
That's a very good point, insects would need to be poisoned for non-organic maple(never seen organic maple?) production and land clearing which would probably be a higher number then honey extraction or possibly egg/diary production? I guess it's more of a grey area because I am sure there would be a way of organically producing it without pesticides but that's the industry standard in our world for everything non-organic.
Definitely a purist area that gets a bit beyond what veganism hopes to accomplish similar to bone char in American sugar and I guess the point I made isn't the best to support the issue of honey but I would still prefer not to consume it because I intent to avoid as many animal products as possible.
Surely even organic farmers use 'natural' products that kill insects......... just because something is natural or organic doesn't mean it's good
According to wiki they use:
allowing for an acceptable level of pest damage;
encouraging predatory beneficial insects to control pests;
encouraging beneficial microorganisms and insects; this by serving them nursery plants and/or an alternative habitat, usually in a form of a shelterbelt, hedgerow, or beetle bank
careful crop selection, choosing disease-resistant varieties
planting companion crops that discourage or divert pests;
using row covers to protect crops during pest migration periods;
using pest regulating plants and biologic pesticides and herbicides
using no-till farming, and no-till farming techniques as false seedbeds;
rotating crops to different locations from year to year to interrupt pest reproduction cycles;
Using insect traps to monitor and control insect populations.
"using pest regulating plants and biologic pesticides and herbicides" - Seems to be the one that's similar to commercial farming. Back to the original question, i do agree that some vegan foods kill more insects then bee farming but it still isn't "vegan" since the coined term specially mentions avoiding honey and the main vegan organisations agree. However that is only if you care about the label "vegan", there is enough ethical comparison to consume honey while still withholding the same animal welfare concerns.