On Sun, 17 Sep 2006 15:33:54 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
><dh@.> wrote in message ...
>> On Sat, 16 Sep 2006 13:01:51 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>
>>>If an argument is self-serving and circular then it should
>>>been seen as suspect and discarded.
>>
>> It should be examimed to see if that aspect of the situation in any
>> way reduces the quality of life for animals.
>
>It is instantly apparent that it has nothing to do with it.
>
>> And the only time that
>> CONSIDERATION OF THE ANIMALS reduces the quality of their
>> lives, is when there's not enough of it.
>
>"Consideration" in this context has no bearing on the quality of their
>lives.

Consideration for the animals' lives encourages decent AW, which
works against "ar", which is why you "aras" are opposed to it. Duh.