usual suspect wrote:

(snip)

> That does nothing to change the fact that
> animals still die horrid deaths from flooded fields,

Flood irrigation is at the low-tech end of irrigation techniques.
Run-off, evaporation and accelerated transpiration rates make it
enormously wasteful. Flood irrigation leads to soil compaction and
changes in soil chemistry. It's used, primarily, in underdeveloped
countries or in the western US for use on _pastureland_, _grassland_,
_alfalfa fields_ and grain crops of the water-guzzling type.

Vegans hooked on rice can select wild varities grown on natural
floodplains.

> pesticide use,

Except for rodenticides and a few baits used against birds, agricultural
pesticides do not target avian and mammalian species. This makes the
deaths from pesticide exposure of members of these species accidental,
at best, and incidental, at least.

> being run over by combines and other farm machinery, etc.

Only grain fields are commonly combined. What is the cutting height of
most grains crops? Compare these to the cutting heights of alfalfa and
other silage crops. Field animals are much more likely to be injured in
an alfalfa field cut at 2" than in a wheat field cut at 12". That photo
of the mangled fawn that you creeps use to 'prove' the existence of
field deaths...it's of a silage field.

Farmers who use an outward spiral harvesting pattern can eliminate most
field deaths. Give animals an avenue of escape from a loud, vibrating,
smoking behemouth of a machine and they'll take it.

As for the danger posed by "other farm machinery", it can be measured in
the width of tire tracks. Again, animals flee from vibrations in the
soil and loud surface noises. They go down or they go out. Field
animals have not attained "pest" status because they die easily.

Lastly, explain how dying in the field where you were born is as
"horrid" as being transported for hours, sometimes days, to a
slaughterhouse, being unloaded into a holding pen with hundreds of
strange animals, being pushed and shocked with prods wielded by
unfamiliar humans, slipping and sliding in the feces and gore of the
animals ahead, and having a bolt gun discharged into your brain,
sometimes twice, sometimes three times.

> > There are other people who argue
> > strongly to the contrary.
>
> Yes, without any facts.

Where are your "facts" showing: 1) a vegan diet causes more suffering
and death. 2) field deaths are as "horrid" as slaughterhouse deaths.
>
> > All you can hope to do is research the issues for
> > yourself and make your own decisions. Think with your brain and your heart.
>
> Your heart doesn't think

Neither does your brain.

> it only bleeeeeeeeeeeeeds.

Okay, now you've got something else to prove. Please show that
compassion is an incorrect human response to the suffering of others.

(snip)

> What's the bloody point in eating something that's supposed to look,
> taste, and/or feel like something you *won't* eat?

Because veganism is not about aesthetics, doofus, it's about reducing
the demand for meat production.

> Hypocrite!

Please demonstrate the hypocrisy in a vegan eating a meat substitute
item.

(snip)
>
> Vegetarian Times sucks.

Not as much as you do.