e3da5f93   
   XPost: alt.creative+cooking, alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, rec.   
   port.football.college   
   XPost: rec.food.cooking   
   From: rupertmccallum@yahoo.com   
      
   On Oct 22, 8:16 pm, dh@. wrote:   
   > >I'm talking about doing what I can to make the outcome better.   
   >   
   >     You're doing nothing for any livestock with your lifestyle, and you   
   should   
   > either accept it and be proud of it because that's your deliberate intent, of   
   > finally do something after however many years of deliberately doing nothing.   
   >   
      
   I've told you what my goals are. You've given me no reason to think   
   that my strategy for pursuing these goals is irrational.   
      
   > >> There are things you could do   
   > >> to contribute to decent lives for livestock without spending a lot of   
   money but   
   > >> it would still be doing more than nothing like you're doing now. If you   
   buy cage   
   > >> free eggs and give them to someone who buys battery farmed eggs then   
   you'll be   
   > >> doing a couple of things instead of nothing, and if you can persuade some   
   people   
   > >> to buy cage free instead of battery farmed you'd be doing that much more   
   than   
   > >> nothing.   
   >   
   > >Or I could donate to Vegan Outreach, as I sometimes do, which tries to   
   > >persuade people to give up animal products or at least cut down on   
   > >them.   
   >   
   >     That does nothing to help any livestock, so even when you pretend to do   
   > something you are still doing nothing.   
      
   It reduces suffering.   
      
   > Doing the thing with cage free eggs I   
   > suggested WOULD BE doing something,   
      
   By donating to Vegan Outreach I am almost certainly helping to   
   persuade some people to switch to cage free eggs.   
      
   > but for years you have done nothing. You   
   > should either accept it and be proud of it, or move on and do something as   
   I've   
   > been encouraging you for how many years now? Several, no doubt, but still   
   you do   
   > nothing.   
   >   
      
   It is not true that I am doing nothing.   
      
   > >This will no doubt have the result that some people move from   
   > >battery cage eggs to free-range eggs.   
   >   
   >     LOL! It's dishonestly on a Goobal level to blatanly lie that encouraging   
   > veganism will promote cage free egg purchases. I don't believe you're stupid   
   > enough to think it somehow could either, meaning you're being deliberately   
   > dishonest. Why would you even want people to think you're supporting ANY   
   kind of   
   > egg production when you're opposed to every bit of it entirely?   
   >   
      
   Vegan Outreach promotes veganism as the ideal, but it also encourages   
   people to adopt compromises if they're not ready for full veganism.   
      
   > >> >> And from the   
   > >> >> animals' position having that done would be priceless. We're talking   
   about   
   > >> >> doubling, tripling, or whatever the lives of the animals so from their   
   position   
   > >> >> the cost could never enter into it.   
   >   
   > >> >But the same might be said of the potential malaria victim in the   
   > >> >Third World whose life I can save. So I have to make the decision   
   > >> >based on something or other, and one of the relevant factors is how   
   > >> >much each option costs, so that I can make the outcome better in the   
   > >> >most economically efficient way possible.   
   >   
   > >> We're discussing whether it might be ok for you to contribute to decent   
   > >> lives for livestock or better to do nothing as you're doing now. What you   
   do in   
   > >> regards to OTHER animals doesn't enter into it, and sadly it's really a   
   form of   
   > >> dishonesty for you to try pretending otherwise.   
   >   
   > >And why would that be, exactly?   
   >   
   >     Because what you do in regards to other animals doesn't enter into it at   
   > all, meaning you're dishonest for trying to dishonestly pretend it does. That   
   > one's so obvious even a misnomer hugger should be able to figure it out.   
   >   
      
   You're a fool.   
      
   > >> So far it still appears that you   
   > >> do hate them btw, even the grass raised cattle you've acted like you could   
   > >> appreciate. If you didn't there would be no reason for you to try   
   changing the   
   > >> subject to humans and away from livestock.   
   >   
   > >You're an idiot.   
   >   
   >     What I said is a fact and IF you can't appreciate it that means YOU are   
   the   
   > idiot, not me for presenting it.   
   >   
      
   What you said is laughable nonsense.   
      
   > >> It undoubtedly depends on a number of things, none of which could cause   
   rice   
   > >> milk to involve fewer deaths than grass raised cow milk imo.   
   >   
   > >How would you know that?   
   >   
   >     I know what my opinion is if that's what you're wondering. And I know the   
   > number of deaths depends on a number of things because it's obvious, like the   
   > number of animals that are in the rice fields for one thing. Whether they use   
   > chemicals and how much is another, whether they get the water from are river   
   or   
   > creek of pump it from wells is yet another. There are more. Can you   
   appreciate   
   > any?   
      
   The question, which you predictably completely failed to answer, is   
   how you would know what the comparison between rice milk and grass   
   raised cow milk is.   
      
   >> I still have some hope that you might be able to rise up at   
   > >> least a little bit at some point during your life and if so I'm curious   
   what the   
   > >> result would be so I'd like to see it if it ever happens. Good luck if   
   you ever   
   > >> try. Try to ignore Goo's attempts to drive you back down if you ever do   
   try   
   > >> moving on a little.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)