"frlpwr" > wrote
> wrote:
> >
> > frlpwr wrote:
> >
> > > Jon wrote:
> > >
> > > (snip)
> > >
> > >
> > >>"vegans", or so-called
> > >>"ethical vegetarians", engage in a classic logical
> > >>fallacy: Denying the Antecedent. It runs like this:
> > >>
> > >> If I eat meat, I cause animals to suffer and die.
> > >>
> > >> I do not eat meat;
> > >>
> > >> Therefore, I do not cause animals to suffer and die.
> > >
> > >
> > > Why do you refuse to be corrected on this point?
> > >
> > > The above should go like this:
> > >
> > > If I eat meat, I cause farmed animals to suffer and die.
> >
> > Because that's not the thinking, and it would be absurd
> > to think it could be.
>
> I would be absurd to think otherwise. As I said in the snipped portion
> of my previous post, no vegan thinks her diet effects the suffering and
> dying of shelter animals, circus animals, animals displaced by human
> development, laboratory animals, animals killed in vehicular
> accidents,etc..
You're REALLY obfuscating here, stick to the topic of diets. A more precise
wording of the fallacy would be as follows:
Eating meat contributes to the deaths of animals.
I don't eat meat therefore *MY diet* doesn't contribute to the deaths of
animals.
The virulent rhetoric of anti-meat campaigners makes it crystal clear that
collateral deaths associated with their non-meat diets are *right* off their
radar screen. Virtually every new vegan who comes here is caught off-guard
by the cd argument.