On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:27:43 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:

>"veganism" commits a massive and classic logical
>fallacy at its very co

No, it doesn't. You commit the fallacy by building a
false argument and then attribute it to vegans as
their's when it isn't.

>Denying the Antecedent. It goes like this:
>
> If I consume animal parts, I cause the suffering
> and death of animals.

This premise is false, since meat can be sourced without
causing any suffering and deaths of animals; it can be
scavenged from animals that died from natural causes.

> I do not consume animal parts;
>
> therefore, I do not cause the suffering and death
> of animals.
>
>This conclusion, of course, is patently false,

And that's why you claim it to be the vegan's argument:
because it's a false argument. In short, you've built a
straw man with a faulty premise instead of dealing with
a more genuine argument vegan's might follow similar to;

1) If I abstain from farmed animal products, then I cause
less farmed animals to suffer and die.
2) I abstain from farmed animal products
therefore
3) I cause less farmed animals to suffer and die.