On 12 Feb 2006 04:46:00 -0800, wrote:

>
>dh@. wrote:
>> On 9 Feb 2006 09:23:09 -0800, wrote:
>>
>> >We could breed dogs and toss them off buildings, really fat dogs that
>> >explode on impact ni satisfying ways. The breeders of these fat dogs
>> >could defend themselves by saying that these fatties cannot survive in
>> >the wild and who are we to deny them the right to live and other
>> >distracting posing-as-if-sympathetic, but in this seemingly more
>> >extreme example - a read of Peter Singer will show that it is simply
>> >seemingly - we would legislate both their work and future barely viable
>> >fat dogs out of existence.
>>
>> We could continue raising animals for food and deliberately
>> provide them with decent lives too. That's what I'm in favor
>> of, and so far no one has suggested something I consider
>> better.
>
>This would seriously cut into profits so it is as much a hallucination
>as me talking about the phasing out of meat eating.

No it's not. There are already cage free eggs available in most
super markets. And grass raised animal products are available for
people who are willing to find and buy them.

>But given these
>are two halluciantions, I think mine is better. For the reasons I said
>earlier, but also because meat eating not only sets up the unnatural
>and often tortuous lives of farm animals, but also denies life of any
>kind to all the creatures that could be supported on that same grazing
>land or the farm land created out of, for example, rainforests, to
>support the growth of vegetable proteins in the inneficient support of
>meat eating.

Rain forests are originally cut down to grow crops, and later can
only be used to grow grass for livestock because the crops have
depleted the soil:
__________________________________________________ _______
"We tried. We worked the land, bit by bit cutting down the
forest. But it rained and rained and rained. The mosquitoes
were insufferable. We experienced terrible suffering," he
says. Used to planting maize and wheat, he had to grow
instead rice and cassava. "At the beginning the rice was
wonderful, but from then on it never produced the same. Now
the only thing this land is good for is grass and livestock."

http://www.nri.org/InTheField/bolivia_s_b.htm
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>It is not simply a choice between a cow with life or no life
>it is also a choice between cow lives and the lifes of many other
>creatures (sometimes even species of animals and plants are threatened
>and destroyed)
>
>Meat eating represents a radical simplification of ecosystems and it is
>not simply the livestock animals who suffer or whose individual and
>species-wide existence is on the table.

I'm in favor of livestock and wildlife both.