XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian   
      
   On Tue, 27 Dec 2011 07:01:43 -0800, Goo wrote:   
      
   >On 12/26/2011 5:40 PM, dh@. wrote:   
   >> On Sun, 25 Dec 2011 14:51:52 -0800, "Dutch"  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> "Jahbulon"  wrote   
   >>>> "Dutch"  wrote in news:1vMJq.2356$zj4.908@newsfe03.iad:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Abstaining from the use of leather is largely symbolic,   
   >>>>> the alternatives are not necessarily any better.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Thank you.  What do you recommend?   
   >>>   
   >>> Leather works better and lasts longer than anything else, is a natural   
   >>> product, so from environmental and utilitarian points of view it is hard to   
   >>> beat.   
   >>   
   >>      It's a byproduct so you should reassure him that no additional   
   livestock   
   >> animals live and die because of leather, or pet food.   
   >   
   >That's false, of course.  Additional livestock animals do live because   
   >of the demand for so-called "by-products".  Everyone knows that.   
      
       No one knows it Goo. Not even you, because it's not true. That's why in all   
   these years you've never found anything that backs up the idea, and why you   
   still can't find anything to back it up now.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)