dh@. wrote
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 20:46:45 -0700, "Dutch" wrote:

dh believes that AR opponents are missing out on the killer argument
against
vegetarians, that eating meat results in livestock animals getting to
experience life,

That's an aspect which must necessarily be factored in in
order to get a realistic interpretation of the big picture.

Yet when I ask you *why* it's necessary you can't provide a direct answer.

It is a *fact* that livestock animals are alive, and the only "realistic"
consequence of that fact is that it implies an obligation to provide them
with good care in order to minimize their suffering. THAT is the AW
consideration, and you provide no reason, no coherent argument that there is
anything beyond that to consider. This extra "consideration" you advocate is
self serving, empty rhetoric.