Jay Santos wrote:
>>> Thanks for the support Retard, I have been pointing this fallacy out
>>> for
>>> weeks. I wonder if they will "get it" now?
>>
>> It's not a fallacy, it's YOU who doesn't get it. The analogy is
>> absurd. The fact that this argument keeps resurfacing illustrates what
>> shaky ground vegans are on.
>>
>> We ARE connected to the deaths of humans in industry when we use those
>> products. That is why many trade unions and other groups boycotted
>> California grapes, because migrant workers were being subjected to
>> unsafe levels of pesticides (which incidentally also kill animals)
>
> That wasn't really the motivation for the boycott. It was
> garden-variety wage-based labor strife.

It still IS. The UFW boycott against grapes continues:
http://www.ufw.org/GB.html

> The original (1960s) boycott
> occurred because the workers were non-union, and the unions wanted a
> piece of the action. Alleged environmental risks for the workers was
> only the pretext.

It wasn't even a major pretext:
It was in response to these deteriorating [economic and work]
conditions, along with the discovery that toxic pesticides
sprayed on grapes threaten farm workers and their children, that
in 1984, Cesar Chavez called on consumers to return to the
boycott of all non-UFW California table grapes-including
"organic" grapes.

>> Once legislation was introduced to correct those abuses, and the level
>> of safety was raised to an acceptable level the boycotts were lifted.
>
> No. It was once the growers capitulated and signed a contract with
> Cesar Chavez's UFW.

They're still trying to shake-down farmers.