XPost: soc.culture.indian, alt.fan.jai-maharaj, alt.religion.hindu   
   XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, alt.animals.rights.promotion   
      
   On Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:57:58 -0800, "Dutch"  wrote:   
      
   >On Tue, 06 Dec 2011 11:56:36 -0800, dh@. wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Thu, 1 Dec 2011 18:23:23 -0800, "Dutch"  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> wrote in message news:bvagd7drjll6ds6nvounhd5a31ltl21mua@4ax.com...   
   >>>> On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 15:33:17 -0800, "Dutch"  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 13:27:28 -0800, dh@. pointed out:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>    All I did was to point out a fact. Apparently it's another one of   
   >>>>>> those   
   >>>>>>facts that you people hate. So it's not me that disgusts you, but the   
   >>>>>>fact is   
   >>>>>>what disgusts you. Why does it "disgust" you that what I've been pointing   
   >>>>>>out   
   >>>>>>for ten years, has been true for ten thousand years?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>A meaningless one.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>    For one thing it's not meaningless and for another even if it was that   
   >>>> would   
   >>>> be no reason for you to hate it.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>Vegans don't promote life for livestock animals, you   
   >>>>>don't promote life for porcupines, who cares?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>    People who want to promote decent AW over elimination. Doiiieee.   
   >>>   
   >>>That is an invalid dichotomy. Doiiieee.   
   >>>   
   >>>"Decent AW"  is promoted over "poor AW"   
   >>   
   >>    It's also promoted over eliminations.   
   >   
   >By you   
      
       LOL!!! By anyone who favors decent AW over elimination.   
   . . .   
   >>>"Elimination" is promoted over "continuation" (of livestock farming).   
   >>>   
   >>>Continuation is necessary before AW of any kind can be a consideration.   
   >>   
   >>    That's one of the reasons why  people who are truly in favor of decent AW   
   >>over elimination must necessarily be opposed to elimination, as I've been   
   >>pointing out to you and you've been trying futiley to oppose for years. Are   
   you   
   >>all of a sudden beginning to finally realise the significance of the fact? If   
   >>so, do you think you'll be able to remember it or do you think you'll   
   unlearn it   
   >>again? Do you think you had learned to appreciate that fact before your last   
   >>unlearning?   
   >   
   >Fa   
      
       DO you think you had learned to appreciate that fact before your mysterious   
   unlearning?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)