My dad once told me that milk is non-vegetarian because after milk extraction (for human consumption?) there isn't enough left for the calf. So it is a cause of misery of the same species of animal for human good (?)
Of course this was from Indian perspective that I grew up with. Would be interesting to know what nations think about the classification of vegetarian and non-vegetarian.
In UK, vegetarians drink milk, vegans don't.
Cows can always make more milk, can't they? It's not a finite resource (unless you consider death of the animal).
In my neck of the woods, vegetarians drink milk, vegans don't.
Vegans dont use anything animals produce. Eggs, milk, furs, hides. Ofc dont eat any animal meat be it in land air or water. Some vegans dont even use products that have bugs used on them so we can say that vegans dont consume anything living. Vegetarians just are meat eaters with stupid logic what animal part they dont use.
A calf is allowed to grow and hence fed. So, I think milk is fine to consume. If you ever observed a cow, they are really smart thinking about equations when not giving milk :D So, if we take them a while and give them nutritious food and an open farm, then all good. But commercial tiny ass no movement place to milk cows...umm..no ty.
Thanks! I now have intel from UK, Canada, and Finland (naming in that specific order) about the classification.
Sorry Hell, gotta polish the GK, but still finicky about the stand of France >:D, for milk of course