> I don't think lacking life has ever been an argument vegetarians use.

That would make sense, since GP said:

> If lacking life is what's cruel, then vegetarianism doesn't really solve that problem.

So if vegetarians used the argument that lacking life is cruel, then vegetarianism would be cruel, right? It makes perfect sense (given GP's point) that they don't use that argument.

You're the third replyer that writes as if they disagree about this while making the same point. I'm wondering if I'm reading this wrong, or if GP edited their comment just before I loaded the page.