On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:41:40 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>"Derek" > wrote in message ...
>> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:59:27 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>"Derek" > wrote in message ...
>>>> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 12:29:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>"Derek" > wrote in message ...
>>>>>> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 11:32:28 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>>>"Derek" > wrote
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm responsible for what I ask for: the death of crops to
>>>>>>>> eat. You are responsible for what you ask for: the death
>>>>>>>> of animals to eat.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>If I ask for the death of animals *and* I am aware that
>>>>>>>abuse of animals takes place, I become complicit in the
>>>>>>>deaths *and* the abuse, even though I did not ask for
>>>>>>>the abuse.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That doesn't make sense. You start off by asking
>>>>>> for the death and abuse of animals, and finish by
>>>>>> stating you didn't ask for any abuse.
>>>>>
>>>>>Where are you seeing that? I *never* asked for the abuse,
>>>>>and didn't say I did.
>>>>
>>>> When you wrote, "If I ask for the death of animals *and*
>>>> I am aware that abuse of animals takes place..." you are
>>>> in deed asking for abuse to take place.
>>>
>>>I don't get your reasoning. I am NOT asking for abuse,
>>
>> Again, when writing, "If I ask for the death of animals *and*
>> I am aware that abuse of animals takes place..." you are
>> in deed asking for abuse to take place.
>
>By that reasoning if you ask for vegetables when you are aware that cds take
>place that means you are asking for cds to take place.

That sentence presupposes collateral deaths are associated
with every item I might buy when it simply isn't the case.
For example, I don't presuppose that a police driver has killed
pedestrians on his way to answer my call, just because police
drivers are known to sometimes kill pedestrians. If he does,
then that doesn't mean to say that I asked him to kill any
pedestrians.