Rat & Swan wrote:

>
>
> Bill wrote:
>
>>> <snip>
>
>
>>>> This laughable claptrap about how it's "necessary" for meat
>>>> production to stop before *anything* can be done about collateral
>>>> animal deaths in vegetable production was dealt with before,
>
>
>>> Never, since it is a strawman of your invention
>
>
>> No, it isn't. It's precisely what you say. You claim
>> that your inaction - your continued participation in
>> the collateral slaughter of animals you don't eat -
>> continues only because the slaughter of animals that
>> are eaten continues.
>
>
> I have never claimed any such thing.

Yes, you have.

>
>> You make your behavior according to principle
>> contingent on other people's behavior.
>
>
> I do not.

Yes, you do. You are lying in claiming you don't.

>
>> That's bullshit. It's not a strawman; it's your bullshit
>> rationale for your inaction, your failure to live
>> according to principle.
>
>
>>> No one says "nothing" can be done; much is done on an
>>> individual and small-group basis.
>
>
>> Nothing is done,
>
>
> That is simply false,

No. It is true. You are not doing anything to
eliminate, or even to reduce, the collateral deaths
caused by the production of the foods you eat.

....

>
>> and you rationalize your do-nothing
>> approach by blaming others.
>
>
> I don't.

You do. You blame your inaction on others' refusal to
see things your way. You claim that vegetarianism
*must* precede doing something, anything, about
collateral deaths.

>
>>> But, as I have said,
>
>
>> Once again.
>
>
>>> for society _in general_
>
>
>> No one is interested in "society in general". People
>> are interested in your moral hypocrisy.
>
>
> I think most rational people interested in ethical issues
> are interested in society in general.

First, they are interested in the moral hypocrisy and
blatant lying of finger-wagging loudmouths like you.

You have no credibility. None.

....