XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 12:06:43 -0700, Goo wrote:   
      
   >On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:55:00 -0400, dh@. wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 18:51:59 -0700, Goo wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:43:45 -0400, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:53:54 -0700, Goo wussiley puled:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:05:20 -0400, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 13:39:24 -0700, Goo wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:05:06 -0400, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 15:39:22 -0700, Goo wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 13:14:14 -0400, dh@. pointed out:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>    Goo doesn't believe any animals benefit from living and it's all   
   the same to   
   >>>>>>>>>>him regardless of the quality of their lives:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>"it is not "better" that the animal exist, no matter   
   >>>>>>>>>>its quality of live" - 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   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>"It is not "good" for the animals that they exist, no matter   
   >>>>>>>>>>how pleasant the condition of their existence." - Goo   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>"It is not "good for them" to exist, no matter how pleasant   
   >>>>>>>>>>the existence." - 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   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>"Shut the fuck up about "consideration" for "their lives"" - Goo   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>""Getting to experience life" has no significance." - Goo   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>"the "getting to experience life" deserves NO moral   
   >>>>>>>>>>consideration, and is given none; the deliberate killing   
   >>>>>>>>>>of animals for use by humans DOES deserve moral   
   >>>>>>>>>>consideration, and gets it." - 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   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>"You consider that it "got to experience life" to be some kind   
   >>>>>>>>>>of mitigation of the evil of killing it." - Goo   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>"The meaningless fact-lette that farm animals "get to   
   >>>>>>>>>>experience life" deserves no consideration when asking   
   >>>>>>>>>>whether or not it is moral to kill them.  Zero." - Goo   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>The statement below is mangled from the original, and so is not a quote.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>    If you want people to think you disagree with yourself about the   
   quote below   
   >>>>>>Goo then YOU need to try to explain how you think you do. Otherwise   
   Goober we'll   
   >>>>>>be left with nothing else to believe other than that you do agree with   
   yourself   
   >>>>>>about all of 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 statement below is mangled from the original, and so is not a quote.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>    If you want people to think you disagree with yourself about the   
   quote below   
   >>>>>>Goo then YOU need to try to explain how you think you do. Otherwise   
   Goober we'll   
   >>>>>>be left with nothing else to believe other than that you do agree with   
   yourself   
   >>>>>>about all of it.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude   
   >>>>>>>>>>than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>The statement below is mangled from the original, and so is not a quote.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>    If you want people to think you disagree with yourself about the   
   quote below   
   >>>>>>Goo then YOU need to try to explain how you think you do. Otherwise   
   Goober we'll   
   >>>>>>be left with nothing else to believe other than that you do agree with   
   yourself   
   >>>>>>about all of it.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing   
   >>>>>>>>>>of the animals erases all of it." - Goo   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>The statement below is mangled from the original, and so is not a quote.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>    If you want people to think you disagree with yourself about the   
   quote below   
   >>>>>>Goo then YOU need to try to explain how you think you do. Otherwise   
   Goober we'll   
   >>>>>>be left with nothing else to believe other than that you do agree with   
   yourself   
   >>>>>>about all of it.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>It's a forgery - not a quote.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>    If you want people to think you disagree with yourself about your own   
   quotes   
   >>>>Goo then YOU need to try to explain how you think you do. Otherwise Goober   
   we'll   
   >>>>be left with nothing else to believe other than that you do agree with   
   yourself   
   >>>>about all of it.   
   >>>   
   >>>It's a forgery, Fuckwit.  Proved.   
   >>   
   >>    It's YOUR quote Goo, but if you want to pretend it's a forgery then try   
   >>presenting some reason to think so. Also Goob, if you want people to think   
   you   
   >>think you disagree with yourself about any of your above quotes, then YOU   
   need   
   >>to try explaining how you want them to think you do. Try now Goo. GO!:   
   >   
   >Not anyone's quote   
      
       That's a blatant lie Goo since it's YOUR quote. Not only did you lie   
   blatantly and obviously Goo, but you also PROVED my prediction correct.   
      
   >>(correct prediction: the Goober can't explain how he wants people to think he   
   >>thinks he disagrees with himself about any of his quotes that I share,   
   because   
   >>he agrees with himself about every one of them)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)