XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian   
      
   On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 13:32:05 -0800, "Dutch"  wrote:   
      
   > wrote   
   >> On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 15:49:42 -0800, "Dutch"  wrote:   
   >   
   >>>>    You used to and of course my guess is you still do to whatever   
   >>>> extent,   
   >>>> since   
   >>>> you do so much that ONLY eliminationists have any decent reason to do.   
   >>>   
   >>>That is a mistaken conclusion on your part. I oppose some of your   
   >>>arguments   
   >>>because they're bad arguments, not because I support AR.   
   >>   
   >>    I sure doubt that of course   
   >   
   >Of course you would, you love your little pet arguments.   
      
       You often do things that ONLY an eliminationist has reason to do, so let's   
   not forget that part.   
      
   >> since you reveal yourself as an eliminationist   
   >> frequently.   
   >   
   >I never do.   
      
       LOL! Just making use of your favorite insulting term for appreciation of   
   lives of positive value reveals you, since ONLY an eliminationist would have   
   reason to use an insulting term for it. Duh.   
      
   >> As I've pointed out many times, referring to appreciation for lives   
   >> of positive value as the LoL is an attempt at insult that ONLY an   
   >> eliminationist   
   >> would have any reason to attempt. Opposing consideration of those same   
   >> lives is   
   >> again something that ONLY an eliminationist would have reason to do.   
   >> Certainly   
   >> NO ONE who truly favors decent AW over elimination has any reason to do   
   >> those   
   >> things, and as we've seen from Etter and Ward Clark even people who don't   
   >> care   
   >> much if anything about AW don't have any reason to oppose the   
   >> consideration I   
   >> suggest. They said they didn't agree, but they made no attempt at all to   
   >> oppose   
   >> the idea.   
   >   
   >They both tried to tell you you were crazy, as have numerous others, but you   
   >won't listen.   
   >   
   >"appreciation for lives of positive value" and "consideration" are self   
   >serving bullshit sophisms.   
   >   
   >Your position is a total lie.   
      
       ONLY an eliminationist would have reason to be restricted to that level of   
   ignorance because only an eliminationist would be unable to develop that sort   
   of   
   appreciation. Instead, IF such a person were to try, it might make him feel   
   "dirty" or something like that which wouldn't apply to a normal person.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)