On 2/27/2011 3:01 AM, Rupert wrote:
> On Feb 24, 11:25 am, dh@. wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 22:20:28 GMT, and/orwww.mantra.com/jai
>>
>> (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote:
>>> Chapter 43: T he Meat-Free Life
>>
>> Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of
>> wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of
>> buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does.
>> What they try to avoid are products which provide life
>> (and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have
>> to avoid the following items containing animal by-products
>> in order to be successful:
>>
>> tires, paper, upholstery, floor waxes, glass, water
>> filters, rubber, fertilizer, antifreeze, ceramics, insecticides,
>> insulation, linoleum, plastic, textiles, blood factors, collagen,
>> heparin, insulin, solvents, biodegradable detergents, herbicides,
>> gelatin capsules, adhesive tape, laminated wood products,
>> plywood, paneling, wallpaper and wallpaper paste, cellophane
>> wrap and tape, abrasives, steel ball bearings
>>
>> The meat industry provides life for the animals that it
>> slaughters, and the animals live and die as a result of it
>> as animals do in other habitats. They also depend on it for
>> their lives as animals do in other habitats. If people consume
>> animal products from animals they think are raised in decent
>> ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the
>> future. People who want to contribute to decent lives for
>> livestock with their lifestyle must do it by being conscientious
>> consumers of animal products, because they can not do it by
>> being vegan.
>> From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
>> steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
>> get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
>> over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
>> get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
>> machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
>> draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is
>> likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings
>> derived from grass raised animals. Grass raised animal products
>> contribute to fewer wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
>> better lives for livestock than soy or rice products.
>
> It seems to me that what you want to say is that if I am interested in
> minimising the amount of suffering and premature death for nonhuman
> animals caused per serving of the food I buy, I would be better off
> going with grass-raised beef than soy or rice products. Can you
> substantiate this? Where exactly can I buy beef that really is
> completely "grass-raised"? How many collateral deaths do you think it
> takes to make a pound of tofu?

Do *you* have any idea how many collateral deaths are involved? No, you
don't. That is perfectly clear, and beyond all dispute - *you* have no
idea.

The point is, the death-and-cruelty minimizing diet *could* be one that
includes carefully selected animal parts, but because you follow a
brainless rule that says "exclude animal parts", you don't adhere to
that diet. There is no valid ethical principle behind your dietary dogma.