XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:21:15 -0800, Goo wrote:   
      
   >On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 18:56:01 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 19:15:24 -0800, Goo wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 18:37:23 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 19:25:25 -0800, Goo wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:05:48 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:40:27 -0800, Goo wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:20:45 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:38:50 -0800, Goo wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 15:34:23 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:44:48 -0800, Goo wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:38:03 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 15:47:39 -0800, Goo wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 13:29:54 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:15:49 -0800, Goo agreed:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 15:16:39 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:23:26 -0800, Goo lied:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:06:20 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:36:27 -0800, Goo lied extremely   
   blatantly:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 17:48:46 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 17:29:10 -0800, Goo wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Oh, and I forgot James Hepler.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Why do some people on one hand call for the extinction of   
   a species   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>while on the other hand lamenting the extinction of   
   another?  Are they   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>not all equal?" - James Hepler   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>James Hepler told you your "animals getting to experience   
   life" nonsense   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>was bullshit.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    He asked if the lives of wildlife and domestic animals   
   should not be   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>considered as equal Goob. That's what I suggest and what   
   eliminationists and   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ONLY eliminationists have reason to oppose, Goo.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>James Hepler told you point blank that your "getting to   
   experience life"   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>bullshit was pure bullshit.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    LOL!!!  A guy who asked "are they not all equal"   
   supposedly is opposed to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>taking them into consideration. HILARIOUS! You are such a   
   stupid Goober, Goo.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>LOL!!!!!!   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>James Hepler did, of course, tell you your "animals getting to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>experience life" story is bullshit.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>       I'm saying to David Harrison that his "at least they get   
   to live"   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>       argument only applies to HIM and humans, that animals don't   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>       derive the benefit of getting to live   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>    How do you think he disagrees with himself then Goo? Also   
   Goober, which   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>animals or beings of any kind do you want us to think don't derive   
   the benefit   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>of getting to live, and why? Do you think any creatures DO derive   
   the benefit of   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>getting to live Goob, and if so what do you think is the   
   distinction between   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>them and livestock animals who you claim don't, do you have any   
   idea?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>James Hepler told you point-blank your "at least they get to live"   
   >>>>>>>>>>>gibberish is bullshit.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>    They do live Goo. Billions of them. Some of them have lives of   
   positive   
   >>>>>>>>>>value and some of negative value, but you people can't appreciate or   
   even   
   >>>>>>>>>>acknowledge the difference.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>No moral meaning to that   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>    Not to YOU Goo, but it has much meaning to people who honestly   
   favor decent   
   >>>>>>>>AW over elimination.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>It has no meaning   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>    Goo people who honestly believe decent AW is ethically equivalent or   
   >>>>>>superior to elimination have no reason to oppose taking those same lives   
   and   
   >>>>>>potential lives into consideration, you stupid STUPID Goober.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>The animals "getting to experience life" has no moral meaning   
   >>>>   
   >>>>    Of course it does Goo, and the fact that you have no clue how much it   
   has is   
   >>>>something else that exposes you.   
   >>>   
   >>>No, it has no moral meaning *at all*, *Goo*.  Everyone knows it -   
   >>>including you.   
   >>   
   >>    It certainly has as much or more than their deaths Goob. ONLY   
   >>eliminationists have reason to oppose considering the animals' lives, Goo.   
   >   
   >No, it does not.  It has *NO* meaning at all   
      
       It sure does Goob and ONLY eliminationists are in a position to be unable   
   to   
   appreciate the fact. And then ONLY the very stupid eliminationists are unable   
   to   
   recognise the meaning at all. The more intelligent ones would recognise it even   
   if they were not able to appreciate it, as most likely no eliminationists are   
   or   
   they would be AW advocates instead of eliminationists, Goo.   
      
   >, *Goo* - zero.  Their   
   >deaths *do* have some meaning, because ending a life is morally   
   >troubling.   
      
       LOL!!! It's hilarious in the most pathetic of ways that you find ending   
   something you consider to be meaningless also morally troubling, Goo.   
   LOL...what   
   a true Goober you are Goob.   
      
   >Changing the course of action so that some animal lives   
   >don't happen is meaningless   
      
       That part we know you can comprehend Goo, but how it has meaning when they   
   DO LIVE is one of the aspects you people are unable to appreciate and some of   
   you can't even comprehend.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)