"Glorfindel" > wrote in message
...
> usual suspect wrote:
>
> Glorfindel wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> There are few examples of vegans even acknowledging the issue
>> of collateral deaths.
>
> There are equally few non-vegans who know about or
> acknowledge them. You are not applying an equal standard
> to them.
========================
ROTFLMAO What a hoot fool! There is no equal,need for them to
know. They aren't claiming to live their lives in such a way as
to kill no/fewer/less animals, dolt. That is what YOU are doing.
Vegans come here claiming they care, and usually that they have
'completely' research their diet, and we know that that is a ly.



>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> and irrelevant in any case.
>
>> It's relevant, Karen. In fact, "don't harm animals" is the
>> foundation of veganism. We know vegans continue to harm
>> animals through either ignorant consumption or ambivelant
>> consumption.
>
> So do non-vegans -- and they add an additional list of harms
> by using animal products. It is easier for a vegan to reduce
> harm by choosing less harmful vegetable products than for a
> non-vegan to reduce harm by continuing to use animal products.
==========================
No, fool, it is not. Tell us what those "less harmful"
vegetables are, killer. You, amd no other vegan has even tried
to find out which veggies cause more/less death and suffering.
It's quite easy for a meat eater to easily and quickly change to
a grass-fed, free-range, or game animals and immediately reduce
the impact that *YOU* calim to care about.


>
>>> Veganism/vegetarianism addresses a specific issue: the use of
>>> animal products.
>
>> Veganism doesn't even address that issue. Vegans suggests
>> they're not harming animals by not eating them, not wearing
>> their hides, not using products tested on animals, and so on.
>
> Insofar as that is true, they are not.
>
>> That's all rhetorical -- in practice, their consumption
>> continues to harm animals by giving up a fraction of an animal
>> at a meal and instead causing many more animals to die from
>> crop production (pesticides, flooding, farm machinery,
>> predation, field-clearing fires, etc.) and by recommending
>> petrochemical-based synthetics in place of leather or fur.
>
> All those things can be changed as vegans become aware of them.
========================
No, they can't. Because as vegans like to say, 'you can't feed
the world' on some meaningless gesture, hypocrite.


> They begin from a better foundation, and a better basic
> philosophy, and have to change fewer things if/when they come
> to know more about other aspects of their consumption.
>
> How can anyone move toward more humane consumption based on
> your philosophy of "it doesn't matter how much harm
> consumers cause to animals if humans find the results more
> tasty or convenient for them"?
==============================
Tell us then how you do it? Afterall, your diet is based on YOUR
taste and conveninece and still kills massive numbers of animals.
Numbers that *could* be reduced tomorrow if your chose the right
meat, eh killer?


> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>