XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   >dh quoted Goo:   
   >>On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 00:30:32 -0700, Goo wrote:   
   >>>On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 13:13:55 -0400, dh@. wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>>>    Humans have as much justification to kill other animals as other   
   animals   
   >>>>have to kill humans and other animals Goo. Some people are capable of   
   moving on   
   >>>>beyond that point and actually consider the animals themselves and what's   
   good   
   >>>>and bad for them. Others of you only want to consider bad things because   
   and   
   >>>>only because considering positive aspects for millions of livestock animals   
   >>>>works against the elimination objective.   
   >>>   
   >>>Show it.   
   >>   
   >>"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" - Goo   
   >>   
   >>"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude   
   >>than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo   
   >>   
   >>"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing   
   >>of the animals erases all of it." - Goo   
   >>   
   >>"it is not "better" that the animal exist, no matter   
   >>its quality of live" - Goo   
   >>   
   >>""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of   
   >>their deaths" - Goo   
   >>   
   >>"Causing animals to be born and "get to experience life"   
   >>(in Fuckwit's wretched prose) is no mitigation at all for   
   >>killing them." - Goo   
   >>   
   >>"Life "justifying" death is the stupidest goddamned thing   
   >>you ever wrote." - Goo   
   >>   
   >>"NO livestock benefit from being farmed." - Goo   
   >>   
   >>"No farm animals benefit from farming." - Goo   
   >>   
   >>"There is nothing to "appreciate" about the livestock "getting   
   >>to experience life" - Goo   
   >>   
   >>"one MUST conclude that not raising them in the first place is the   
   >>ethically superior choice." - Goo   
   >   
   >You didn't show it.   
      
       I showed that you only want to consider bad things because and only because   
   considering positive aspects for millions of livestock animals works against   
   the   
   elimination objective, Goo.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)