On 11/1/2012 8:58 AM, dh@. wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2012 14:30:52 -0700, Dutch > wrote:
>
>> dh@. wrote:
>>> IF you honestly favor AW over elimination
>>
>> Those are not the alternatives, you are collapsing two decisions into
>> one. By doing so you make your argument nonsensical.
>>
>> 1. I favor continuation (of livestock breeding) over elimination (of
>> domestic livestock species).
>>
>> 2. I favor "AW" over neglect of animal needs or outright abuse.
>>
>> People who do not say yes to 1. are not faced with decision 2. at all.
>> They cannot be accused of "not supporting AW", because, first, their
>> lifestyles don't introduce the possibility of animal neglect or abuse,
>> and secondly, they may well be an advocate and supporter of "AW" by
>> means of deliberate third party actions, which many are.
>>
>> Of course you've seen this indisputable argument a hundred times at
>> least and you never get it, so you won't now.
>
> Of course I do get it which is why I say they don't support it with their
> lifestlye which they don't.

Meaningless. No one is obliged to buy animal products. Not buying them
has no ethical meaning.