The 'vegan' shuffle
On 3/5/2012 9:36 AM, Glen wrote:
On 05/03/2012 15:42, George Plimpton wrote:
On 3/4/2012 9:43 PM, Rupert wrote:
I don't believe that I have any way of knowing how the number of
premature deaths caused per calorically equivalent serving of tofu
compares with that for grass-fed beef or wild-caught fish.
You know, intuitively and based on plausibility, that raising the
vegetable crops you would have to substitute in order to get equivalent
nutrition causes multiple CDs,and that 100% grass-fed beef or
wild-caught fish causes none.
Eating meat causes the death of animals.
Cultivating, harvesting and distributing vegetables and fruits causes
the deaths of animals, too.
There's no getting away
from that fact until you stop eating meat and go vegan.
"Going 'vegan'" doesn't mean causing no deaths of animals. Furthermore,
organic or "sustainable" farming absolutely depends on animal manure,
and that manure only exists because of animal husbandry.
So, vegetable production unquestionably causes animal suffering and
death, and organic or "sustainable" vegetable production depends on the
manure from animals that exist in order to be exploited for human use.
"vegan" are fully implicated in animal suffering and death.
There's only a small chance that animals were killed to produce my food.
There is a 100% certainty that animals were harmed, including being
killed, in order to produce your food.
You don't want to acknowledge the huge difference between fact
You have presented no "fact" that warrants any examination.
and plausibility because you want to make vegans feel as guilty
as you do for all the pain, misery and death on your plate.
No, I want "vegans" to acknowledge that their belief system is flawed
beyond salvage. "veganism" is predicated on illogical nonsense.