Matheny:
[Stephen] Davis’s argument fails on three counts:
first, Davis makes a mathematical error in using
total rather than per capita estimates of animals
killed; second, he focuses on the number of animals
killed in production and ignores the welfare of
these animals; and third, ***he does not count the
number of animals who may be prevented from
existing***. When we correct these errors, Davis’s
argument makes a strong case for, rather than
against, adopting a vegetarian diet.
Fuckwit:
Since the animals we raise for food would not be
alive if we didn't raise them for that purpose, it's
a distortion of reality not to take that fact into
consideration whenever we think about the fact that
the animals are going to be killed. The animals are
not being cheated out of any part of their life by
being raised for food, but instead they are
experiencing whatever life they get as a result of it.
Fuckwit David Harrison is making an "ar" argument. It
is "ar" thinking to want to cause more animals to be
born and "get to experience life".
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
