dh@. wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 12:01:06 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> >
> ><dh@.> wrote
> >> The Logic of the Larder means decent AW.
> >
> >No, it doesn't.
>
> Your hero said it does:
>
> "when their life is a fairly happy one." - Salt

You left a huge part of it off, ****wit - the part that shows the
illogic of the larder is *not* about "decent aw":

"*IF* such reasoning [that it is better for them to live and to be
butchered than not to live at all] justifies the practice of
flesh-eating, it must equally justify all breeding of animals for
profit or pastime, when their life is a fairly happy one."


But you don't demand that their lives be happy ones, ****wit, in
deciding whether or not life is a "benefit". You believe that life
-per se- is a benefit to farm animals, and that it justifies
subsequently killing them:

"Life itself is the benefit which makes all other
benefits possible."
- ****wit David Harrison


You consider life -per se- to be a "benefit", ****wit - something of
"positive value" - IRRESPECTIVE of the quality of life.