XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, talk.politics.animals, alt   
   food.vegan.science   
      
   On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 07:50:07 -0700, Goo wrote:   
      
   >On 3/17/2012 1:05 AM, Rupert wrote:   
   >> On Mar 15, 6:12 am, Goo wrote:   
   >>> It's just a hideously ugly fake word on its face, and the loathsome   
   >>> ideas and false beliefs encapsulated in it are even more hideously ugly.   
   >>   
   >> What's ugly about the ideas involved in veganism?   
   >   
   >False morality is inherently ugly, especially when it involves self   
   >exaltation and sanctimony.   
      
       How do you want people to feel that your anti-consideration is superior to   
   having consideration for lives of positive value for livestock Goob? Rupert   
   might be able to help you with that, but he doesn't know what it means to have   
   a   
   life of positive value instead of a life of negative value. The doesn't believe   
   the distinction between the two different types of situation means anything.   
   Maybe if you can help him comprehend what the distinction is and how it is   
   significant, he can help you figure out how refusing to consider lives of   
   positive value is superior to taking them into consideration.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)