Rupert wrote:
There are plenty of respectable arguments for ethical vegetarianism.

All based on assumptions that are peculiar to the ethical vegetarian,
and hence utterly meaningless to all the rest of us that reject those
assumptions.

You have given no evidence that you are aware of what they are.

There are meaningless to me, so I have tuned them out.

You are welcome to laugh at ethical vegetarianism if you want,

I laugh at all isms.

It's very interesting that you can dismiss a belief system purely on
the grounds that it is "ideological". What's your definition of an
ideology?

The inherently flawed idea that a group of assumptions is Truth and
that they can be systematically applied to real life. This usually
ends up involving the redefinition of words from the meaning used by
everyone else to some peculiar form that is a nice inside-joke for the
True Believers.

The redefinition of "murder" to include animals is one such
redefinition, and it begs the question of why killing animals is
murder, but not killing vegetables? Hence the song I posted.

I apologize if your newsgroups have been polluted with a topic you
don't regard as worthy of serious consideration. It was David Harrison
who did that, for reasons best known to himself, not the ethical
vegetarians.

No apology is necessary. One merely had to look at the header lists to
see that it wasn't serious discussion.

lojbab