Oh I get what you are saying, you are just incorrect - and parroting poor sources. You are also unable to distinguish *the practices of the meat industry* from *meat, as a discrete source of food*. Your compatriots are trying to take the poor practices of a mass-market industry, and assume that the meat they produce represents all meat in all places at all times. It doesnt. If you were arguing for agri-business and food industry reform then I would actually be *with* you on that.


As far as your comments regarding will of the "majority" , I honestly hope you pause for a second... reflect... and realise how insane what you just said is. Might does not make right, whether the might derives from popularity or not. Popularity does not equate to righteousness. Millions of people can in fact be wrong. Also, whether it is "popular" or not - if the end result of not following that "will of the popular crowd" results in armed men coming and throwing you in a cage - guess what? That is forced coercion.

So does this mean that you have renegged on your previous statements regarding you not wanting to force other people to your view? Because if you support armed men coming and throwing meat eaters in a cage, provided your view becomes sufficiently popular - then you have in fact renegged on your previous statements.

Also the people I know who lived to 90 and 100 also lived with quality.

In addition - making a point regarding the Atkins deit.. actually reinforces MY point, not yours. First - its another example of you trying to take an extreme case, and somehow assert its applicability to your point. All meat is just as extreme as no meat... I do not see how you would think you are making a valid argument there. Second - I have always said that people are eating too much in general, it does not matter if it is meat or not. Eating too much is eating too much. If you eat too much and do not move your body enough, you get sick. Your point again?

Are you saying that China is and has always been mostly Vegan? If not, I would drop that line of argument because it plays into my hands not yours (again, never said that many westerners do not eat MORE meat than is healthy, or that modern agribusiness is good) - if you are saying they are mostly Vegan, then make it clear so I can quickly debunk it and we can move on.

And finally... is your argument about human welfare, or animal welfare? The whole " knives and forks are weapons of mass destruction" and such videos seem to paint a picture of an argument that is certainly not pro-human in nature. But rather an argument that we should subsume human desire and need to the percieved desires of non-human creatures.

I get what you are saying regarding human welfare - again, you are just wrong and parroting poor sources. Sources that I might add, typically care nothing for humans. You also should look into the ties and overall agenda of some of the global elites that are propogating this type of thought.

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)