Originally Posted by Cricket2
The only person whose posts I have found to be truly attacking have been DAD22's.

If I am wrong here, I am open to reinterpreting my reactions, though. For those of you who are not veg*n, please do tell me how I should interpret these posts in a manner that is not meant to insult or bait the veg*ns or imply moral inconsistency:
Originally Posted by DAD22
As I posted earlier, veg*ns kill animals so they can eat plants. Small mammals are killed when harvesting combines run across a field. Insects (a type of animal) are killed by pesticides. You can attempt to minimize the massive amounts of animal deaths required to sustain you, but unless you're farming your own land with special animal-safe techniques, you're responsible for a lot of death. To imply that there is a difference of kind rather than a difference of degree between most veg*ans and most meat eaters is either disingenuous or ignorant.
Originally Posted by DAD22
Most likely any negative reactions are born out of prior experiences with outspoken, self righteous, judgmental, proselytizing veg*ns.
Quote
There's also the issue of animals killed during the farming process.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_eating_meat#Debate_over_animals_killed_in_crop_harvesting

If you don't value human life over the lives of field mice, I'm afraid it's going to be very difficult to continue your existence. Vegetarians and vegans still have animal blood on their hands.

Cricket2, do you disagree that the consumption of food in a diet typical of most veg*ns results in animal deaths? Am I not supposed to point that out for some reason? HK was discussing the lines of reasoning that may or may not lead to a vegetarian diet, and I commented on the complexities associated with them. I did that specifically in this thread, as it seemed to be relevant information for any non-veg*ns who may have children contemplating a meat free diet. It's not a black and white issue.

The only snarky remark I made was in response to what you posted here:

Originally Posted by Cricket2
I've generally found that negativity toward veg*ns comes a lot from people think that the veg*ans are judging them so they are being preemptively nasty.

The point of my post was to question the implications of your post:
1) Negativity towards veg*ns is generally preemptive rather than reactionary.
2) Negativity towards veg*ns is generally a result of a misunderstanding on the part of non-veg*ns.
3) That you are privy to the thoughts of people you accuse of being preemptively nasty.

The first 2 implications seem biased to me, and the last seems unlikely. My response was written to be equally biased and presumptive in order to balance your statements and highlight the issues with your post so that you might confront them. Now I am curious if anyone was able to recognize my intent.

Last edited by DAD22; 06/27/13 08:40 PM. Reason: address zen scanner's comment below