Scented Nectar wrote:

>>"If the spices I needed were available locally I would
>>[consume only locally grown produce]."
>>
>>- Skanky Carpetmuncher, 27 Dec 2004
>
>>When and if they learn about CDs, "vegans" are forced
>>to acknowledge that they do not live a "cruelty free"
>>life, merely by following the "vegan" rule of "do not
>>consume animal parts." The usual course of retreat is
>>to make an intermediate stop at the false claim, "I am
>>doing the best I can to reduce animal death." This is
>>quickly seen to be a false claim: different vegetable
>>crops cause different numbers of CDs. The production
>>of rice, for example, is exceptionally lethal to
>>animals, far more so than other starchy grains. To the
>>extent the "vegan" eats rice rather than other, less
>>lethal grains, she is not "doing the best she can" not
>>to cause animal death.
>
>
> Despite variances in individual foods, you know
> full well that eating vegan causes way, way less
> cds as a whole than the animal product industry
> as a whole, due to livestock's extensive need
> for far more cropland (thus more cds).

This is the second retreat, AGAIN: you are trying to
defend yourself by saying "vegans cause fewer deaths
than omnivores". You are implicitly admitting that you
aren't "doing the best you can", and you're comforting
yourself with the false and ethically bankrupt belief
"I'm doing better than you".

You can't say why you think it "good" to reduce animal
deaths in the first place.

>
>
>>There is no question that she is NOT "doing her best",
>>as she could easily forgo the spices. She has, for the
>>SECOND time, retreated from the claim "I'm doing the
>>best I can" to the vastly weaker claim of "I think I'm
>>doing better than you, which is good enough for me."
>
>
> I never made a claim of doing better than you.

Yes, you did; you make it every time you talk about
"average" "vegans" versus "average" omnivores.

You still can't say why you think it is "good" to
reduce animal deaths in the first place.