Help! Decided to go vegetarian but my husband hates veggies!

Options
1457910

Replies

  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    Not all vegans base their decision on a "love" for animals, by the way. This may be why you are having trouble understanding the motivation for it. Veganism is not about control over food, it's an ethical position on animal exploitation. Since food is a major source of animal exploitation, it can often come across that way to those less familiar with veganism, however. If you'd like to discuss it more, we certainly can -- I understand that it can be difficult to wrap your head around when you first consider it, acceptance of animal exploitation is certainly deeply rooted in our thought patterns.

    I don't think she is trying to control his food choices. There's no indication in the OP that she is trying to do that. I think she is trying to figure out how to navigate this change while disrupting their current food routine as little as possible. If she does feel a need to control him, that would be a whole different issue.

    Thank you for confirming that animal rights has nothing to do with a love of animals. But no, trot out the "exploitation" word and you've lost me. I don't have time for animal rights twaddle.

    If I were the husband, after all these suggestions of letting him cook for himself, letting him cook his own meat, cooking a portion of meat that is supposed to feed him for a week or whatever, I'd be looking for someone else who shared my values and my lifestyle. Meals are a social thing in families. I don't feel sociable with someone who is making a value judgment on what I decide to eat. It's another matter when, as another person posted, there was a real medical issue that prevented her from eating meat.

    Animal rights isn't based on "loving" animals any more than a belief in human rights is based on a "love" of humans. Individual vegans may love animals, but love isn't necessary in order to have a standard for how one treats others. I'm not sure what it is you don't have time for -- aren't we engaged in a conversation right now? It doesn't take more time to try to genuinely understand another's POV if one is already engaged in conversation. If you are declaring that you will refuse to do so, I appreciate your candor. If there is a word I could use other than "exploitation" that would keep you from getting lost, let me know. I'm not sure how else to describe it, but there could be other ways.

    Meals are a social thing in my family as well. Families don't always agree on their ethical stances. That shouldn't prevent them from sharing a meal together if they'd like, although I understand not all families function in this way. I'd rather eat with someone I loved, even if we disagreed. Do you think it is possible for people with ethical-based standards for how animals are treated and those who reject those standards to live together? I don't think we have to give up so easily.
  • callsitlikeiseeit
    callsitlikeiseeit Posts: 8,627 Member
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Lol guess he's gonna have to learn how to cook.

    I wonder how you would feel if you were in that situation, you come how from work and find your husband ready to eat dinner but he made himself dinner and nothing for you because you're now a vegetarian. Everyone gets to sit down and eat but you have to go make yourself dinner. Would you be okay with that?

    EXACTLY!!!!
  • Yakelmeyer
    Yakelmeyer Posts: 49 Member
    Options
    There are a ton of good food blogs that can help with recipes and preparing foods that one wouldn't normally eat. I recommend: One Green Planet, anything by Isa (so easy and delish), and of course, Oh She Glows.

    Goal based cooking helped get my pallet to open up and try new things.

    Enjoy!
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »

    That's probably one of the most absurd things I've ever read on MFP. And there have been some outrageous things said around here.

    Don't like it? That's fine. We're not married. It's called "growing apart" and couples do it all the time. I don't see the value of staying in a relationship with someone who puts his/her needs above the good of the relationship. Been there, done that.
    PRMinx wrote: »

    Tough one.

    So, I wouldn't date a vegetarian, vegan, pescatarian...or anyone on a restrictive diet. I get that.

    But, marriage? I mean, didn't you make the whole "through sickness and health, till death do us part" vow? I would think that if you love someone enough to marry them, then you would stick by them. What if the diet change was a result of a medical condition?

    I've already said that's a different matter.

    Right.....not wanting to eat the same food is growing apart. Lol

    I wonder what the religious teachings would say about that approach.

    You're looking at it strictly from a dietary point of view. If a person is eating a vegan or vegetarian diet for so-called ethical reasons, then yes, that would be growing apart from someone who does not see eating meat as being unethical. Religious teachings would probably be behind me on this one, since wives are supposed to "honor" their husbands and husbands are supposed to value their wives. *shrugs* I find that I don't get along very well with a person who has decided that my moral compass is off and that every meal becomes a moral issue.

    Eating sustains life. It is not a moral act.

    Are you saying that no action made in the context of procuring food can be unethical? Or just those that involve animals?

    Even omnivores, I think, can agree that some decisions made in procuring food can be immoral. The disagreement is mainly about whether or not actions that impact animals can be included in this.
  • chantalemarie
    chantalemarie Posts: 66 Member
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    RGv2 wrote: »
    so either way then she HAS to make him dinner and she's the one who's screwed because she wants something else? having someone prepare a meal for you is a privilege not a right

    Does she HAVE to, no. There are many things in marriage that we do, not because we HAVE to, but because we love the person that we're with and it is part of way we have compromised and split the household duties.

    so maybe he should eat the vegetarian food she makes because he loves her and has compromised that as part of having every meal prepared for you, you have slightly less of a say of what it is.

    And you could also argue she can make him meat because she loves him and comprises by not eating it herself but can still make it for him. You're being pretty one sided. Think before you type.

    so again she's the one who has to compromise? seems to be the one side to me... lol

    You're still looking at it from one side. You say he needs to adapt and not her. You fail to see that their could be some middle ground. Either way, run along because I can already see you are looking at things through tunnel vision or maybe exteme pro feminism view.

    I don't fail to see middle ground at all. like I said previously, it is a privilege to have someone cook your meals every night. it's also a privilege to have someone always vacuum or do outside chores, so if those are his chores than great, the work may even out. all I'm saying is that the middle ground, is that he gets his supper made for him. if you go to a restaurant and want something that's not on the menu, what do you do? ask the cook to compromise and make you something that he's not offering? no, you order something that is there and reasonable. I'm don't discussing this with someone who is so narrow minded and ignorant to the situation. I hope if you have a wife, girlfriend, boyfriend, husband (or someone in your life) who makes all your meals for you, that you don't take advantage of their kindness.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,006 Member
    Options
    Not all vegans base their decision on a "love" for animals, by the way. This may be why you are having trouble understanding the motivation for it. Veganism is not about control over food, it's an ethical position on animal exploitation. Since food is a major source of animal exploitation, it can often come across that way to those less familiar with veganism, however. If you'd like to discuss it more, we certainly can -- I understand that it can be difficult to wrap your head around when you first consider it, acceptance of animal exploitation is certainly deeply rooted in our thought patterns.

    I don't think she is trying to control his food choices. There's no indication in the OP that she is trying to do that. I think she is trying to figure out how to navigate this change while disrupting their current food routine as little as possible. If she does feel a need to control him, that would be a whole different issue.

    Thank you for confirming that animal rights has nothing to do with a love of animals. But no, trot out the "exploitation" word and you've lost me. I don't have time for animal rights twaddle.

    If I were the husband, after all these suggestions of letting him cook for himself, letting him cook his own meat, cooking a portion of meat that is supposed to feed him for a week or whatever, I'd be looking for someone else who shared my values and my lifestyle. Meals are a social thing in families. I don't feel sociable with someone who is making a value judgment on what I decide to eat. It's another matter when, as another person posted, there was a real medical issue that prevented her from eating meat.

    Animal rights isn't based on "loving" animals any more than a belief in human rights is based on a "love" of humans. Individual vegans may love animals, but love isn't necessary in order to have a standard for how one treats others. I'm not sure what it is you don't have time for -- aren't we engaged in a conversation right now? It doesn't take more time to try to genuinely understand another's POV if one is already engaged in conversation. If you are declaring that you will refuse to do so, I appreciate your candor. If there is a word I could use other than "exploitation" that would keep you from getting lost, let me know. I'm not sure how else to describe it, but there could be other ways.

    Meals are a social thing in my family as well. Families don't always agree on their ethical stances. That shouldn't prevent them from sharing a meal together if they'd like, although I understand not all families function in this way. I'd rather eat with someone I loved, even if we disagreed. Do you think it is possible for people with ethical-based standards for how animals are treated and those who reject those standards to live together? I don't think we have to give up so easily.
    Agreed. I'm not vegan but I presume that the primary goal was to reduce suffering, and being vegan helps to do that?

  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,006 Member
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    RGv2 wrote: »
    so either way then she HAS to make him dinner and she's the one who's screwed because she wants something else? having someone prepare a meal for you is a privilege not a right

    Does she HAVE to, no. There are many things in marriage that we do, not because we HAVE to, but because we love the person that we're with and it is part of way we have compromised and split the household duties.

    so maybe he should eat the vegetarian food she makes because he loves her and has compromised that as part of having every meal prepared for you, you have slightly less of a say of what it is.

    And you could also argue she can make him meat because she loves him and comprises by not eating it herself but can still make it for him. You're being pretty one sided. Think before you type.

    so again she's the one who has to compromise? seems to be the one side to me... lol

    You're still looking at it from one side. You say he needs to adapt and not her. You fail to see that their could be some middle ground. Either way, run along because I can already see you are looking at things through tunnel vision or maybe exteme pro feminism view.

    I don't fail to see middle ground at all. like I said previously, it is a privilege to have someone cook your meals every night. it's also a privilege to have someone always vacuum or do outside chores, so if those are his chores than great, the work may even out. all I'm saying is that the middle ground, is that he gets his supper made for him. if you go to a restaurant and want something that's not on the menu, what do you do? ask the cook to compromise and make you something that he's not offering? no, you order something that is there and reasonable. I'm don't discussing this with someone who is so narrow minded and ignorant to the situation. I hope if you have a wife, girlfriend, boyfriend, husband (or someone in your life) who makes all your meals for you, that you don't take advantage of their kindness.
    I do 95% of the cooking and my wife gladly takes advantage of that, and I'm happy that I can make her happy, doing what makes me happy. Relationships are not 50/50 and if someone thinks they are, they're in for a big let down.

  • LoupGarouTFTs
    LoupGarouTFTs Posts: 916 Member
    Options
    Okay, it's time for me to go do things with my day. I have paid writing to do and dogs who need feeding, bathing, and walking. However, before I go, I want to clarify a few things:

    1) I am not talking about making a change from eating an omnivorous diet to a vegetarian diet for the heck of it or due to medical reasons. I am talking about someone who has made an "ethical" choice to become a vegetarian or a vegan. I only mentioned it because, way back in the thread, someone suggested that the OP was making the change for ethical reasons and I did not see the idea refuted. I may have missed it. I don't know. But no, I do not believe that people who enjoy living with animals and eating animals can live comfortably with "ethical" vegans and vegetarians. I have MANY personal reasons for that stance, most of which would not apply to everyone and the rest of them are NOYB.

    2) The church is all about ethics and morals. Yeah. That's kind of why they exist. They want marriages to be "valid" and entered into for the right reasons. People who make ethical changes in their lives, especially those that conflict with their previous beliefs and those upon which the marriage was built will probably get a look from an ecclesiastical court. I'm not saying the look is going to be in favor of the person wanting an annulment, but it can happen. Both sides get scrutinized, painfully so, and the whole relationship is taken under consideration.

    3) Don't tell me I don't know about marriage or its value or the values associated with it. You don't know me and should not judge me. I was married in a church in 1985--wrap your head around that date for a second. After 11 years of marriage, we moved to another state. After another two, he decided he was leaving me for another woman. Little problem: he was not going to pay for a divorce and I could not do so on my income. All these years later, we are still separated. He has been in two relationships since then, all of whom have moved into the home we shared. He has not offered me a bit of support or a divorce so that I can move on. I cannot take part in certain church rites and I do not feel I can enter into another relationship while I am still married on paper. I live below the poverty line and he has all the benefits of a two-income family. And, without putting two fine a point on it, he takes advantage of other "benefits" of marriage and I do not because I will not engage in adultery.

    Go ahead. Tell me again how I don't value marriage or know what it's about.

    Sheesh.
  • PikaKnight
    PikaKnight Posts: 34,971 Member
    edited April 2015
    Options
    If you are claiming that someone going vegetarian is a legit reason for divorce, then yeah I'll say it. You don't know.

    And your situation sucks but there are still ways to go about getting a divorce or taking legal action so you don't have to support him. Lots of choices that could have been made and hopefully you'll be able to research them and go ahead and finally get your divorce.
  • LoupGarouTFTs
    LoupGarouTFTs Posts: 916 Member
    Options
    PikaKnight wrote: »
    If you are claiming that someone going vegetarian is a legit reason for divorce, then yeah I'll say it. You don't know.

    And it sucks but there are still ways to go about getting a divorce or taking legal action so you don't have to support him. Lots of choices that could have been made and hopefully you'll be able to research them and go ahead and finally get your divorce.

    One last time: "going vegetarian" is not the issue.
  • Grimmerick
    Grimmerick Posts: 3,342 Member
    edited April 2015
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Okay, it's time for me to go do things with my day. I have paid writing to do and dogs who need feeding, bathing, and walking. However, before I go, I want to clarify a few things:

    1) I am not talking about making a change from eating an omnivorous diet to a vegetarian diet for the heck of it or due to medical reasons. I am talking about someone who has made an "ethical" choice to become a vegetarian or a vegan. I only mentioned it because, way back in the thread, someone suggested that the OP was making the change for ethical reasons and I did not see the idea refuted. I may have missed it. I don't know. But no, I do not believe that people who enjoy living with animals and eating animals can live comfortably with "ethical" vegans and vegetarians. I have MANY personal reasons for that stance, most of which would not apply to everyone and the rest of them are NOYB.

    2) The church is all about ethics and morals. Yeah. That's kind of why they exist. They want marriages to be "valid" and entered into for the right reasons. People who make ethical changes in their lives, especially those that conflict with their previous beliefs and those upon which the marriage was built will probably get a look from an ecclesiastical court. I'm not saying the look is going to be in favor of the person wanting an annulment, but it can happen. Both sides get scrutinized, painfully so, and the whole relationship is taken under consideration.

    3) Don't tell me I don't know about marriage or its value or the values associated with it. You don't know me and should not judge me. I was married in a church in 1985--wrap your head around that date for a second. After 11 years of marriage, we moved to another state. After another two, he decided he was leaving me for another woman. Little problem: he was not going to pay for a divorce and I could not do so on my income. All these years later, we are still separated. He has been in two relationships since then, all of whom have moved into the home we shared. He has not offered me a bit of support or a divorce so that I can move on. I cannot take part in certain church rites and I do not feel I can enter into another relationship while I am still married on paper. I live below the poverty line and he has all the benefits of a two-income family. And, without putting two fine a point on it, he takes advantage of other "benefits" of marriage and I do not because I will not engage in adultery.

    Go ahead. Tell me again how I don't value marriage or know what it's about.

    Sheesh.

    Just because you've gone through a marriage and through a divorce does not automatically mean your views on marriage are the best and not skewed as a result of your personal experiences.

    There is no way in hell that since 1998 (i'm assuming) you couldn't have obtained a divorce, you just don't want to go through the process which admittedly would be made even harder by having to slowly save for it, but by now if you really wanted it you would have it. Meanwhile, Get the divorce and live your life to it's fullest or stop caring about that little piece of paper that's stopping you from having a meaningful relationship with someone, you are responsible for your own situation now, enough time has passed to where there is no excuse for not having moved forward. At this point now the blunt of the blame for not being divorced is on you. Or stay as you are you have a right to your own welfare.

    Would still like a response on how animal rights and animal welfare have nothing to do with each other.

  • LoupGarouTFTs
    LoupGarouTFTs Posts: 916 Member
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Okay, it's time for me to go do things with my day. I have paid writing to do and dogs who need feeding, bathing, and walking. However, before I go, I want to clarify a few things:

    1) I am not talking about making a change from eating an omnivorous diet to a vegetarian diet for the heck of it or due to medical reasons. I am talking about someone who has made an "ethical" choice to become a vegetarian or a vegan. I only mentioned it because, way back in the thread, someone suggested that the OP was making the change for ethical reasons and I did not see the idea refuted. I may have missed it. I don't know. But no, I do not believe that people who enjoy living with animals and eating animals can live comfortably with "ethical" vegans and vegetarians. I have MANY personal reasons for that stance, most of which would not apply to everyone and the rest of them are NOYB.

    2) The church is all about ethics and morals. Yeah. That's kind of why they exist. They want marriages to be "valid" and entered into for the right reasons. People who make ethical changes in their lives, especially those that conflict with their previous beliefs and those upon which the marriage was built will probably get a look from an ecclesiastical court. I'm not saying the look is going to be in favor of the person wanting an annulment, but it can happen. Both sides get scrutinized, painfully so, and the whole relationship is taken under consideration.

    3) Don't tell me I don't know about marriage or its value or the values associated with it. You don't know me and should not judge me. I was married in a church in 1985--wrap your head around that date for a second. After 11 years of marriage, we moved to another state. After another two, he decided he was leaving me for another woman. Little problem: he was not going to pay for a divorce and I could not do so on my income. All these years later, we are still separated. He has been in two relationships since then, all of whom have moved into the home we shared. He has not offered me a bit of support or a divorce so that I can move on. I cannot take part in certain church rites and I do not feel I can enter into another relationship while I am still married on paper. I live below the poverty line and he has all the benefits of a two-income family. And, without putting two fine a point on it, he takes advantage of other "benefits" of marriage and I do not because I will not engage in adultery.

    Go ahead. Tell me again how I don't value marriage or know what it's about.

    Sheesh.

    Just because you've gone through a marriage and through a divorce does not automatically mean your views on marriage are the best and not skewed as a result of your personal experiences.

    I'm not divorced. Maybe you missed that part. :) We've just lived in separate states since 2001, while he continues to live in our former home in a state of adultery.

    My point is that when a person makes a decision that changes the foundation upon which the marriage is built, there might be some blowback. The OP should even expect some blowback, considering how human cultures are wrapped up in food and how food affects relationships. Mine decided he was threatened by my graduating from college, which we had discussed previous to my enrolling and had discussed how our lives could be better if I went to school for my degree (he needed to get his GED before going to college and failed to do even that). I was >this close< to graduating and getting work at the CDC when he decided he would be better off elsewhere.

    People who fear changes in their lives will push back at those changes. People who decide for the both the people in the relationship what changes will be made based on their own desires should expect the other partner to push back, afraid of changes or not. Even people who seem to be okay with a change can end up not being okay with it and decide "out of the blue" to make their own decision and leave the relationship. The OP would be very foolish indeed to expect everything to remain at the status quo, having decided to alter a major part of the social fabric of the marriage.

    Now, darn it, I have to get Boudreau out on his walk. He's just discovered the joy of walkies and treats and I need to capitalize on that.

    Or, as certain people might say, I have to exploit my dog by encircling his neck with the cruel symbol of his slavery and force him to consume small bits of barely nutritious food items after he has performed unnatural behaviors (like sitting on command) for my amusement.

    Ciao.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    if you go to a restaurant and want something that's not on the menu, what do you do?

    Get up and go to a different restaurant, usually.

  • PikaKnight
    PikaKnight Posts: 34,971 Member
    edited April 2015
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Okay, it's time for me to go do things with my day. I have paid writing to do and dogs who need feeding, bathing, and walking. However, before I go, I want to clarify a few things:

    1) I am not talking about making a change from eating an omnivorous diet to a vegetarian diet for the heck of it or due to medical reasons. I am talking about someone who has made an "ethical" choice to become a vegetarian or a vegan. I only mentioned it because, way back in the thread, someone suggested that the OP was making the change for ethical reasons and I did not see the idea refuted. I may have missed it. I don't know. But no, I do not believe that people who enjoy living with animals and eating animals can live comfortably with "ethical" vegans and vegetarians. I have MANY personal reasons for that stance, most of which would not apply to everyone and the rest of them are NOYB.

    2) The church is all about ethics and morals. Yeah. That's kind of why they exist. They want marriages to be "valid" and entered into for the right reasons. People who make ethical changes in their lives, especially those that conflict with their previous beliefs and those upon which the marriage was built will probably get a look from an ecclesiastical court. I'm not saying the look is going to be in favor of the person wanting an annulment, but it can happen. Both sides get scrutinized, painfully so, and the whole relationship is taken under consideration.

    3) Don't tell me I don't know about marriage or its value or the values associated with it. You don't know me and should not judge me. I was married in a church in 1985--wrap your head around that date for a second. After 11 years of marriage, we moved to another state. After another two, he decided he was leaving me for another woman. Little problem: he was not going to pay for a divorce and I could not do so on my income. All these years later, we are still separated. He has been in two relationships since then, all of whom have moved into the home we shared. He has not offered me a bit of support or a divorce so that I can move on. I cannot take part in certain church rites and I do not feel I can enter into another relationship while I am still married on paper. I live below the poverty line and he has all the benefits of a two-income family. And, without putting two fine a point on it, he takes advantage of other "benefits" of marriage and I do not because I will not engage in adultery.

    Go ahead. Tell me again how I don't value marriage or know what it's about.

    Sheesh.

    Just because you've gone through a marriage and through a divorce does not automatically mean your views on marriage are the best and not skewed as a result of your personal experiences.

    There is no way in hell that since 1996 you couldn't have obtained a divorce, you just don't want to go through the process which admittedly would be made even harder by having to slowly save for it, but by now if you really wanted it you would have it. Meanwhile, Get the divorce and live your life or stop caring about that little piece of paper that's stopping you from having a meaningful relationship with someone, you are responsible for your own situation now, enough time has passed to where there is no excuse for not having moved forward. Or stay as your are you have a right to your own welfare.

    Would still like a response on how animal rights and animal welfare have nothing to do with each other.

    tumblr_lr6uiqel0X1r2hybuo1_400.gif
  • PikaKnight
    PikaKnight Posts: 34,971 Member
    Options
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    if you go to a restaurant and want something that's not on the menu, what do you do?

    Get up and go to a different restaurant, usually.

    I'm not sure why I'd be in that restaurant. If I wandered into a random one, I'd stay and give it a go. But if I already wanted something in particular, I'd have gone to a place I know had what I wanted.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    edited April 2015
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Okay, it's time for me to go do things with my day. I have paid writing to do and dogs who need feeding, bathing, and walking. However, before I go, I want to clarify a few things:

    1) I am not talking about making a change from eating an omnivorous diet to a vegetarian diet for the heck of it or due to medical reasons. I am talking about someone who has made an "ethical" choice to become a vegetarian or a vegan. I only mentioned it because, way back in the thread, someone suggested that the OP was making the change for ethical reasons and I did not see the idea refuted. I may have missed it. I don't know. But no, I do not believe that people who enjoy living with animals and eating animals can live comfortably with "ethical" vegans and vegetarians. I have MANY personal reasons for that stance, most of which would not apply to everyone and the rest of them are NOYB.

    2) The church is all about ethics and morals. Yeah. That's kind of why they exist. They want marriages to be "valid" and entered into for the right reasons. People who make ethical changes in their lives, especially those that conflict with their previous beliefs and those upon which the marriage was built will probably get a look from an ecclesiastical court. I'm not saying the look is going to be in favor of the person wanting an annulment, but it can happen. Both sides get scrutinized, painfully so, and the whole relationship is taken under consideration.

    3) Don't tell me I don't know about marriage or its value or the values associated with it. You don't know me and should not judge me. I was married in a church in 1985--wrap your head around that date for a second. After 11 years of marriage, we moved to another state. After another two, he decided he was leaving me for another woman. Little problem: he was not going to pay for a divorce and I could not do so on my income. All these years later, we are still separated. He has been in two relationships since then, all of whom have moved into the home we shared. He has not offered me a bit of support or a divorce so that I can move on. I cannot take part in certain church rites and I do not feel I can enter into another relationship while I am still married on paper. I live below the poverty line and he has all the benefits of a two-income family. And, without putting two fine a point on it, he takes advantage of other "benefits" of marriage and I do not because I will not engage in adultery.

    Go ahead. Tell me again how I don't value marriage or know what it's about.

    Sheesh.

    Just because you've gone through a marriage and through a divorce does not automatically mean your views on marriage are the best and not skewed as a result of your personal experiences.

    There is no way in hell that since 1998 (i'm assuming) you couldn't have obtained a divorce, you just don't want to go through the process which admittedly would be made even harder by having to slowly save for it, but by now if you really wanted it you would have it. Meanwhile, Get the divorce and live your life or stop caring about that little piece of paper that's stopping you from having a meaningful relationship with someone, you are responsible for your own situation now, enough time has passed to where there is no excuse for not having moved forward. Or stay as your are you have a right to your own welfare.

    Would still like a response on how animal rights and animal welfare have nothing to do with each other.

    A legal divorce and a church divorce are very different in some religions. Some religions make it very hard and very expensive to divorce. And religion is very important to some people. And this is very off topic for this thread.
  • tomatoey
    tomatoey Posts: 5,446 Member
    Options
    Haven't read other responses so sorry if repeating - I'd invest in some kind of grill and let him do his meats that way. It takes almost no time or knowledge. He might get into it.
  • tomatoey
    tomatoey Posts: 5,446 Member
    Options
    Also, it's possible to find butchers who sell ethical meat