XPost: alt.philosophy, alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, alt.global-warming   
      
   On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 00:23:33 -0700, "Dutch"  wrote:   
      
   >   
   > wrote in message news:eegkr55vopvke7n6al96ieb2et19nqli78@4ax.com...   
   >> On Sun, 4 Apr 2010 13:41:01 -0700, "Dutch"  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> wrote in message news:4pphr5ts5qq5gpujiv0tdvhphie3phl9mm@4ax.com...   
   >>>> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 13:02:34 -0700, "Dutch"  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> wrote in message   
   >>>>>news:m6a7r5pcu1gtnd7etuc88k6g81gl7bb7s5@4ax.com...   
   >>>>>> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 19:11:37 -0700, "Dutch"  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> wrote in message   
   >>>>>>>news:vvj4r5t9k0poigoj1go9jp52htcofosr92@4ax.com...   
   >>>>>>>> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:34:06 -0700, "Dutch"  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> wrote   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>    My guess is that he pretty much only hangs out with people   
   >>>>>>>>>> who are even less "tolerant" than he is, making him feel somewhat   
   >>>>>>>>>> more free. Remember at one time he pretended to be in some way a   
   >>>>>>>>>> "new welfarist" until Goo and his other boy kicked Rupert's ass   
   >>>>>>>>>> for pretending to consider the lives of some animal(s)   
   >>>>>>>>>> somewhere....possibly even som *livestock* animal(s). But he   
   >>>>>>>>>> can't do it and you can't do it and Goo can't do it and Salt   
   >>>>>>>>>> couldn't do it....you people just can't do it.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>Nobody should do "it", and the reason nobody but you does is because   
   >>>>>>>>>"it"   
   >>>>>>>>>is   
   >>>>>>>>>self-serving bullshit.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>    It's a necessary part of evaluating whether or not it's cruel   
   >>>>>>>> TO THE ANIMALS for humans to raise them for food.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>That doesn't mean anything.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>    Not to those of you too purely selfish to take the animals   
   >>>>>> into consideration, but it's very significant to anyone who does   
   >>>>>> consider them.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Meaningless, self-serving tripe.. patting yourself on the back for being   
   >>>>>a   
   >>>>>person who "considers" animals when all you do is eat them.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>    I consider the billions more that I don't eat as much as the   
   >>>> ones that I do, while misnomer addicts can't afford to consider   
   >>>> any.   
   >>>   
   >>>Explain the purpose of this "considering" of any of them.   
   >>   
   >>    Considering significant aspects of the situation like that   
   >> gives me a more realistic interpretation than misnomer addicts   
   >> are able to form by only considering things that support the   
   >> elimination objective.   
   >   
   >Explain the significance, I don't see it.   
      
       The significance is to the animals. You probably do see it   
   and are lying when you say otherwise, because considering the   
   animals works against your purely selfish objective.   
      
   >>>You can't,   
   >>   
   >>    That's a blatant lie.   
   >>   
   >>>because   
   >>>it's its only purpose is to serve your circular little self-serving   
   >>>argument   
   >>>and you are loath to admit it.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>What a complete joke you are.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>    What a completely selfish person you are.   
   >>>   
   >>>Selfish towards whom or what?   
   >>   
   >>    Every single creature other than yourself:   
   >   
   >In what sense?   
      
       In every sense apparently. In what sense could we pretend you   
   are being anything more than purely selfish? Not in any sense at   
   all.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)