Rupert wrote:
>>You have ZERO basis for your belief that you
>>"contribute to as little animal suffering as possible",
>>other than the fact that you don't eat meat. You are
>>committing a logical fallacy: the fallacy of Denying
>>the Antecedent.
>>
>> If I eat meat, I cause the death and suffering of
>>animals.
>>
>> I don't eat meat;
>>
>> therefore, I don't cause the death and suffering of
>>animals.
>>
>>This is plainly false: you can cause the death and
>>suffering of animals in LOTS of ways other than by
>>killing them to eat them.
>
> My claim is not that I don't contribute the death and suffering of
> animals. It is that I contribute as little as possible.

Without any objective evidence by which you or anyone else can measure.
IOW, you merely BELIEVE you're doing the something beneficial.

>>GIVEN that *all* you have
>>done is refrain from (or stop) eating meat, you have NO
>>IDEA how many animals you cause to suffer and die in
>>other ways than eating them: you haven't bothered to
>>check.
>
> I have some idea.

No, you have some FAITH.

> I'm always happy to find out more,

Did you investigate any of the claims of the activists before you
swallowed their hook?