John Paul Wootton on life as a vegan.

I have to start with some honesty: I did not become a Vegan for compassionate reason. That said, it is exactly why I remain one.

I was always vaguely aware of Veganism and slightly more conscious of the idea of animal rights. I’ve always had an underlying sympathy for non-human animals, especially concerning our treatment of them. This mostly manifested itself as support in ‘spirit’ without any real or concrete action. So when I saw or heard about chickens held in battery conditions, or circus animals being mistreated and ‘broken’, I would tut and shake my head. This was the extent of my indignation and if ever this inaction troubled me, I’d reassure myself “sure, I’m in jail, what can I do?”

Then along came the health documentaries and the possibility that those who eat a plant based diet generally live longer and are freer from age-related illnesses. Along with this too was the potential to loose some weight.

I am like a lot of my generation. Body image is something that we are forced to be concerned with. Whatever the reasons this is the reality. Losing weight, then, was regularly on my mind. I tried all sorts of diets and each of them ultimately failed. So I decided that a Vegan diet would be my next attempt.

Once I’d begun the diet I immediately began to reflect on my decision – was it a good decision? How long would I stick it out? Have I done this for the right reasons?

This last question stuck with me and suddenly all the issues around animal welfare came to the fore in my mind. After a while attempting to grapple with this I made a decision: whatever my reason for initially going Vegan, I was making it a permanent part of my life and there was no turning back. It mattered too much to me now.

As part of my reflection a key question was: now that I was out, how could I go back to feeding into a system that causes so much unnecessary suffering and harm when another option exists?

So, although I started off as a ‘health-conscious’ Vegan, I would now say that I’ve begun an ethical evolution. I say evolution because it will be a process, the speed of which will, to a certain degree, be determined by my circumstances.

Nevertheless my journey has started and I hope many more will set off on the same journey.

➽John Paul Wootton is imprisoned in Maghaberry. 

Going Vegan

John Paul Wootton on life as a vegan.

I have to start with some honesty: I did not become a Vegan for compassionate reason. That said, it is exactly why I remain one.

I was always vaguely aware of Veganism and slightly more conscious of the idea of animal rights. I’ve always had an underlying sympathy for non-human animals, especially concerning our treatment of them. This mostly manifested itself as support in ‘spirit’ without any real or concrete action. So when I saw or heard about chickens held in battery conditions, or circus animals being mistreated and ‘broken’, I would tut and shake my head. This was the extent of my indignation and if ever this inaction troubled me, I’d reassure myself “sure, I’m in jail, what can I do?”

Then along came the health documentaries and the possibility that those who eat a plant based diet generally live longer and are freer from age-related illnesses. Along with this too was the potential to loose some weight.

I am like a lot of my generation. Body image is something that we are forced to be concerned with. Whatever the reasons this is the reality. Losing weight, then, was regularly on my mind. I tried all sorts of diets and each of them ultimately failed. So I decided that a Vegan diet would be my next attempt.

Once I’d begun the diet I immediately began to reflect on my decision – was it a good decision? How long would I stick it out? Have I done this for the right reasons?

This last question stuck with me and suddenly all the issues around animal welfare came to the fore in my mind. After a while attempting to grapple with this I made a decision: whatever my reason for initially going Vegan, I was making it a permanent part of my life and there was no turning back. It mattered too much to me now.

As part of my reflection a key question was: now that I was out, how could I go back to feeding into a system that causes so much unnecessary suffering and harm when another option exists?

So, although I started off as a ‘health-conscious’ Vegan, I would now say that I’ve begun an ethical evolution. I say evolution because it will be a process, the speed of which will, to a certain degree, be determined by my circumstances.

Nevertheless my journey has started and I hope many more will set off on the same journey.

➽John Paul Wootton is imprisoned in Maghaberry. 

17 comments:

  1. Thanks for carrying these letters. When he emerges from this, he will have some perspective on what really matters, from a route i wouldn’t wish on anyone though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I enjoy reading him too. Hopefully he writes some more

      Delete
  2. I was always vaguely aware of Veganism and slightly more conscious of the idea of animal rights.


    What about vegetable/plant life rights? From slicing potatoes and putting them into boiling hot oil or roasting them in an oven, peeling the skin of sprouts, chopping and dicing carrots/parsnips...turnips and boiling them scalding water?????

    Basically the smells we all love, freshly cut grass, flowers in a vase....the sweetness of a lot of root veggies..Well that scent is how vegetation lets other forms of plant life know it is in distress. Throw into the mix all these health conscious vegan/eco warriors...Do they ever stop to consider how a lot of their exotic fruits and veggies arrive on the island? They are either flown in or by boat (think of all the fossil fuel needed to power a cargo ship, fly a huge plane) and covered in plastics and they have the bare faced cheek to tell me I cant skin a rabbit of roast a chicken.........


    Do people also know that hundreds if not thousands of vegetables are abused every day. Help stop vegetable abuse ......<--Quillers 30 seconds long and a much watch, take a leap of faith...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Whatever, especially as under such difficult circumstances as you find yourself John Paul, that keeps you going is to be encouraged. Anything that stretches one and gives one's life that bit of extra meaning or deeper purpose is of considerable use in maintaining one's sanity in difficult circumstances.

    (Don't be going the route of Shane Paul though)!

    ReplyDelete
  4. my daughter saoirse at the age of 9 went vegan and is enjoying all sorts of vegan foods she's now 11,i talked to the doctor about it when she started it and the doctor said it was normal for anyone no matter what age to be vegan(honestly i had never heard much about it before) but the doctor did mention one thing to me that made me think, she said that she would never drink milk or have any dairy products as in the animal world not one animal would drink another animals milk except humans and that she only drinks almond milk in her tea and has it in her cereal,,, there years ago tried it and it was rough but after forcing myself for about two weeks i love it, i now can't have tea with regular milk as it would make me puke,try it lads its a great choice

    ReplyDelete
  5. Pity you never considered the ethics of taking another human life first!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pity you didn't consider the evidence against the guy Steve. I have no idea of his guilt or innocence but the bar has to be higher than where it was placed for a conviction of that nature be reached.

      Delete
  6. How far higher do you want the bar raised to Anthony?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Beyond reasonable doubt, higher than it was in the Guildford 4 or Birmingham 6

      Delete
  7. Like having the shooters coat with DNA and gunshot residue in the boot of your car, that was also being tracked by the spooks to the very location, which then buggered off sharpish after the fact? Come on Anthony. I can only hope his sudden location of his conscience regarding animal life extends to the rest of his being. I'm just sickened another young life has been wasted away by incarceration while another widow grieves. And for what?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Comments from "Unknown" are not published on TPQ. You can retain your anonymity but use a distinguishing name to avoid being confused with others who also seek to post as Unknown.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Steve - as the barrister said at the trial, not the slightest shred of evidence to show that the residue was connected to the shooting on the night. Spooks tracking car or spooks running an operation as Gerry Conlon suggested?

      There was an witness who's evidence was ridiculous medically impossible, who was dismissed by his own family as a Walter Mitty and a liar. There have been accusations of spying by MI5, the destruction of evidence by the SAS, the sabotage of the appeal by the PSNI, the planting of evidence by the prison service.

      I don't know if the guy did it or not but like many others I have serious reservations about the way the thing was handled and the quality of evidence. And at the back of it all we know it is what the British state does. The PSNI eager as ever to suppress evidence in respect of the past is for some reason determined to get the evidence in this case. Too many unresolved matters.

      If the men are innocent then there is the additional crime against the family inflicted by the PSNI and prosecution - telling it that they had convicted the people who killed their father when in fact they had done no such thing. But we have a litany of such crimes against families behind us to know just how plausible it is to believe the British police would do such a thing.

      Delete
  9. Steve

    Both the Trial Judge and Court of Appeal came to the same conclusions, effectively "We do not know what you did but we think you did it!" That is crazy reasoning for example at paragraph 56 of appeal judgment the LCJ states: "The prosecution never ascribed a particular role to the appellant and contended that he must have been involved in some unspecified way. " And it concluded in support of the Trial Judge, at paragraph 151 "It was not necessary for him to determine the role that each of the appellants played."

    Fact is if the Courts, after hearing all the evidence, cannot conclude that they did anything then it is not safe for the court to assume or speculate that they must have done something.

    ReplyDelete
  10. While I take both your points, I'd argue that these days electronic intelligence has made it a lot easier for the Spooks to identify with accuracy who has done what. And with BritIntel clearly having a vested interest in keeping the shinners onboard....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. it hardly matters that they might know who does what - it matters that the conviction may not be safe. There is a case going on now in Belfast where the spooks are withholding on disclosure. How can what they say about a person be regarded as accurate?

      Delete
  11. Stevie WTF has what you are saying got anything to with the rights and wrongs of going vegan..?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. frankie,

      Because of the massive double standard in taking a human life but being all angsty about taking an animals life?

      Delete