Ron wrote:
> In article .com>,
> "Rudy Canoza" > wrote:
>
> > Fudgepacker wrote:
> > > In article >,
> > > usual suspect > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ron the pathetic little homo wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>Vegans are responsible for their own consumption and the
manner in which
> > > > >>their own food is produced.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > By what _moral_ principle are they responsible for the manner
in which
> > > > > their food is produced?
> > > >
> > > > *Their own*. See their websites, you stupid fudgepacker. Read
their
> >
> > > > literature. They claim to live cruelty-free lives and they
oppose
> > the
> > > > death of animals. Their consumption of mechanically-harvested
> > foods,
> > > > transported and stored foods, etc., proves otherwise.
> > > >
> > > > >>They have a variety of options -- including
> > > > >>growing their own food or paying farmers to grow in a manner
> > consistent
> > > > >>with "vegan ethics" -- but they choose instead to operate
under
> > the
> > > > >>delusion that their diet is cruelty-free merely because they
> > don't eat
> > > > >>meat. Their consumption is as slothful as your abhorrent
attempts
> > to use
> > > > >>logic, Ron.
> > >
> > > Which vegan killed what animal
> >
> > It doesn't matter. Their behavior rewards the farmer for producing
> > food in a way that is lethal to animals. That's all you need to
know.
>
> You are ignoring the question.

Right: because it isn't a serious question. It's a weak attempt at
sophistry.

> Which vegan killed what animal.

See above.

>
> > The dead animals are not individually assignable to people, but
then,
> > you already knew that; your question was not a serious question,
merely
> > sophistry.
>
> So then, we have dead animals with no identifiable killers

No. Once again, you have deliberately misrepresented what was written,
because you imagine yourself to be clever. Try again.