On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 05:21:59 GMT, swamp >
wrote:

>On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 20:20:23 GMT, 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.
>>
>> I do not eat meat;
>>
>> Therefore, I do not cause farmed animals to suffer and die.
>
>As long as we're shooting for accuracy, it should be:
>
>If I eat meat, I cause farmed animals to suffer and die.
>
>I do not eat meat, therefore, I do not cause farmed animals to suffer
>and die,

Very good.

>and make this point because it helps me ignore the death and
>suffering my own diet causes.

What death and suffering? you have scientific, peer reviewed data that
a particular company, farm, product is a direct cause of wildlife
deaths? if so, show them and we can analyze your proof. Nothing allows
us to ignore any deaths of animals or humans.

>Demonizing others is less painful than accepting my own role in life
>and death.

You demonize yourselves and simply cannot stand the fact there
actually are some nice, caring people out there, who do things for the
benefits of others and nothing else, even so, since when has feeling
good about oneself been a crime?


Snip it there, KISS.





'You can't win 'em all.'
Lord Haw Haw.