home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.food.vegan      Yeah but beef tastes good...      19,117 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 17,917 of 19,117   
   dh@. to Goo   
   Re: Attn: Woopert - "glen" claims to be    
   03 Apr 12 14:49:07   
   
   XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, talk.politics.animals, alt   
   food.vegan.science   
      
   On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 12:47:27 -0700, Goo wrote:   
      
   >      Wilson Woods:   
   >      They answer, "It is morally wrong, in an absolute sense   
   >      - unjust, in other words - if humans kill animals they   
   >      don't need to kill, i.e. not in self defense." There's   
   >      your answer.   
   >   
   >So, the mangled pseudo-quote was not anyone speaking on his own behalf,   
      
       You told us the way you feel about it Goob, but if you want to try   
   explaining how you think you disagree with yourself then try doing it. Go:   
   . . .   
   >> 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."   
   >   
   >Actual statement:   
   >   
   >      If you are an "animal rights activist", and you believe   
   >      that the nutritionally unnecessary choice deliberately   
   >      to kill an animal ALWAYS causes a moral harm greater in   
   >      magnitude than either the potential moral "loss" that   
   >      results from not raising the animal in the first place,   
   >      or the moral "benefit" realized by the animal in   
   >      existing at all, then 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.   
      
       Goober we know you DO believe that:   
      
   the nutritionally unnecessary choice deliberately   
   to kill an animal ALWAYS causes a moral harm greater in   
   magnitude than . . . the moral "benefit" realized by the animal in existing at   
   all.   
      
   "A high-welfare life is not a "benefit" compared   
   with never existing." - Goo   
      
   "NO livestock benefit from being farmed." - Goo   
      
   "the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in   
   magnitude than ANY benefit they might derive from   
   "decent lives"" - Goo   
      
   "animals *DO NOT* benefit from being farmed, Goo." - Goo   
      
   "No farm animals benefit from farming." - Goo   
      
   "Life is not a "benefit" to livestock or any other animals." - Goo   
      
   "it is not "better" that the animal exist, no matter   
   its quality of live" - Goo   
      
   "No animal "benefits" from coming into existence." - Goo   
      
   No animal is "better off" as a result of existing, versus   
   never existing." - Goo   
      
   "getting to experience life" is not a benefit." - Goo   
      
   "No zygotes, animals, people, or any other living thing   
   benefits from coming into existence." - Goo   
      
   "It is not "better" in any moral way, and not in *any* way   
   at all to the animal itself, that the animal exists." - Goo   
      
   "NO animals benefit from farming" - Goo   
      
   "Coming into existence is not a benefit to them:  it does   
   not make them better off than before" - Goo   
      
   "Being born is not a benefit in any way.  It can't be." - Goo   
      
   "Life -per se- NEVER is a "benefit" to animals or even   
   to humans " - Goo   
      
   "It is not "better" to exist than not to exist" - Goo   
      
   "getting to experience life" is not a benefit." - Goo   
      
   "Coming into existence is not a benefit for any animal" - Goo   
      
   "I *know* animals don't "benefit" from "getting to   
   experience life".  They don't because there is no   
   alternative.  They don't because they don't care   
   that they "get to experience life".  They don't   
   because they can't conceive of the idea of "benefit"" - Goo   
      
   "Existence per se is not a "benefit" to ANY living thing" - Goo   
      
   "Then livestock animals' existence is not a "benefit"   
   to them" - Goo   
      
   ""life" CANNOT be a "benefit" to animals" - Goo   
      
   "life itself is NOT a benefit at all. " - Goo   
      
   "An entity's coming into existence is not a benefit to   
   that entity." - Goo   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca