XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, talk.politics.animals, alt   
   food.vegan.science   
      
   On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 00:04:25 -0700, Goo wrote:   
      
   >On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:04:58 -0400, dh@. wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 13:53:41 -0700, Goo wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:21:49 -0400, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:36:30 -0700, Goo wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:47:38 -0400, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 22:12:54 -0700, 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.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Below are all true.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>    Then you're saying that some people SHOULD become vegans, Goo.   
   >>>   
   >>>No   
   >>   
   >>    You say so specifically you stupid Goober.   
   >   
   >No.   
      
       Here's a clue for you Goo: When you say some people should be vegans,   
   you're   
   saying some people should be vegans.   
      
   >>>, I'm saying it's a logically consistent choice for some people who   
   >>>have irrational and wrong notions about animals.   
   >>   
   >>    You're saying that some people SHOULD become vegans, Goo.   
   >   
   >No.   
      
       Here's a clue for you Goo: When you say some people should be vegans,   
   you're   
   saying some people should be vegans.   
      
   >>>>>>"People who don't want them to exist should be "vegans"." - Goo   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>""vegans" are interested in their influence on animals,   
   >>>>>>Fuckwit.  They want everyone to be "vegan", which would   
   >>>>>>mean no animals raised for food and other products. That's   
   >>>>>>an influence, whether you like it or not." - Goo   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>logically one MUST conclude that not raising them in the first place is   
   the   
   >>>>>>ethically superior choice." - Goo   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>""Veg*nism" certainly doesn't harm any living farm animals.   
   >>>>>>And if everyone adopted "veg*nism", no farm animals would   
   >>>>>>live in bad conditions." - Goo   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>you MUST believe that it makes moral sense not   
   >>>>>>to raise the animals as the only way to prevent the harm that   
   >>>>>>results from killing them." - Goo   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude   
   >>>>>>than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of   
   >>>>>>their deaths" - Goo   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing   
   >>>>>>of the animals erases all of it." - Goo   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>"Humans could change it. They could change it by ending it." - Goo   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>"There is no "selfishness" involved in wanting farm animals not to   
   >>>>>>exist as a step towards creating a more just world." - Goo   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)