The original post was lamenting the existence of products such as agave nectar as attempting to falsely lead people astray that are looking for alternatives to sugar, as a more 'healthier' choice. I posited a completely separate motivation that someone might have for choosing/using agave nectar (one that I might add does not necessarily have anything to do with being 'healthy').

The conversation is coming off like:

  Original Post: "People might choose agave nectar for
                 <reason 1>, but it fails to deliver what
                 they are attempting to do."

  Me: "Agave nectar doesn't exist just to satisfy
      people with <reason 1>. There are people that might
      choose it for <reason 2>."

People seem to be attempting to 'rebut' me with, "BUT <REASON 1>!" I really don't understand it.

You're right and I apologize. I can't stand when people talk "past" each other in discussions/arguments. My comment was about Agave in general and not the particular aspect you spoke of.

Aside 1: I'd heard that Agave wasn't that good nutritionally and did a quick search to clarify. The first piece I read was actually about how many people see Agave nectar as a raw food sweetener when in fact it is cooked at 250+ degrees for many hours to break down the starches into simpler fructose.

Aside 2: To be fair, the original discussion was about health effects not the philosophical/moral considerations our our food choices.