OP:
I was a vegan, for health reasons, I sill wore leather riding gear (camel skin, to be precise.) I find it curious that non-vegans are so curious, though. My understanding of a pure vegan lays along the lines of a Taoist. Not the rigid pomp and ceremny Taoists (like the Confucians that have adopted basic Taoist principles) or philosophical and whimsical, like the Buddhist who incorporated the Tao Te Ching within their beliefs.
To a Taoist, all life is equal, and we must each choose a path that puts us in the most harmony with all life, so that we can be in harmony with ourselves. To be a Taoist, we must try, by not trying; we must understand why you can never, step into the same puddle twice. To be a Taoist, one must always be walking the "natural path." I studied Taoism, as much as someone like me can, I like the tenets, and decided to model a lot of my life code after it. The past of least resistance, the natural path, also keeps you at harmony with nature, and with others around you. It's all a game of balance.
That being said, Vegans... I'm curious about one thing, I've cracked jokes about it, but I'd really like to know. How can one be a Vegan, if any life is injured or harmed? Wouldn't a vegan only be a pure or true vegan if they ONLY ate the true "gifts of plants." I.e. ripe fruit, ripe nuts and legumes, certain "vegetables," gourds, and posthumously gathered grains? If all life is equal, as is posited frequently by vegans, than what's the justification for killing vegetables to eat them? My problem with all life being equal, and being special, is the problem with most absolutes. It negates it's "special" status, by encompassing all. If all are equal, and all are equally special, than someone that willingly chops up a cauliflower head should find no insult in chopping up a deer, cow, dog, human, or whale.