XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, alt.animals.rights.promotion,   
   soc.culture.usa   
      
   On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 17:48:15 -0800, Goo lied:   
      
   >On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:48:50 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 12:00:05 -0800, Goo wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 14:31:15 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:03:40 -0800, Goo wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 19:11:26 -0500, dh@. wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 23:02:40 +0000, Derek    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>There's at least one more vegetarian I can think of who does a pretty   
   >>>>>>>good job in keeping that character group alive. He's Australian, you   
   >>>>>>>know. From a country that probably has one of the richest reserves of   
   >>>>>>>humour in the world.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>    There's an Australian clown here who claims to have a PhD in math   
   yet can't   
   >>>>>>comprehend a simple aspect of life we discussed in class in grade   
   school. In the   
   >>>>>>grade school I went to, he probably would have been in special ed:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>"I don't believe the distinction between "lives of positive value" and   
   >>>>>>"lives of negative value" means anything." - Rupert   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>unless he was lying when he wrote that. An indication that he was is   
   that he   
   >>>>>>claimed to have been able to comprehend the distinction previous to his   
   claim   
   >>>>>>that he can not:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>"I said to David Harrison that there exist some farmed animals such   
   >>>>>>that it would be a better outcome for them to live the life they do   
   >>>>>>rather than for them not to live at all and for no animals to live   
   >>>>>>in their place." - Rupert   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>Do you think it's likely that he could comprehend at one point, and then   
   later   
   >>>>>>he unlearned? If so, how do you think he unlearned? If not, why do you   
   think he   
   >>>>>>started lying about it?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>No,   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   There's more to it than that Goob. Try again: Do you think it's likely   
   that   
   >>>>Rupert could comprehend at one point, and then later he unlearned? If so,   
   how do   
   >>>>you think he unlearned? If not, why do you think he started lying about it?   
   >>>   
   >>>There's nothing more to it than that   
   >>   
   >>    Do you think it's likely that Rupert could comprehend at one point Goob,   
   and   
   >>then later he unlearned? If so Goober, how do you think he unlearned? If not   
   why   
   >>do you think he started lying about it, Goo?   
   >>   
   >>>>>you did not ever discuss in grade school how "getting to experience   
   >>>>>life" is a benefit.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>    Goober we discussed slavery in the US and the fact that some slaves   
   were   
   >>>>content with their lives meaning they had positive value to them and that   
   other   
   >>>>slaves had lives which they considered to be good. We discussed the fact   
   that   
   >>>>the value could and did change for them too Goo. We discussed that when   
   they   
   >>>>became free they often couldn't find jobs so many agreed to stay on as   
   slaves   
   >>>>until things changed over the years... We discussed more than that too   
   Goo, like   
   >>>>that some people would remain slaves even when life was of negative value   
   to   
   >>>>them pesonally, in the hopes that things would be better for their   
   children. But   
   >>>>such details are necessarily beyond the mental ability of people who don't   
   see   
   >>>>how life could ever be a benefit ...LOL... to anything. It's also beyond   
   the   
   >>>>ability of someone who doesn't think the distinction between lives of   
   positive   
   >>>>and negative value means anything, to appreciate how the difference between   
   >>>>lives of positive and negative value means anything, Goo. We were doing it   
   by   
   >>>>the sixth grade Goober, but Dr. Rupert claims that he can't do it at all.   
   He   
   >>>>claimed that he could in the past Goo, but has either unlearned or is   
   still able   
   >>>>to do it while lying that he can't. Either way seems very stupid from my   
   pov,   
   >>>>Goo.   
   >>. . .   
   >>>You did *NOT* ever talk about slaves "benefiting" from "getting to   
   experience life.   
   >>. . .   
   >>>Every elementary school child in the US "discusses" that   
   >>   
   >>    Yet your brother Dr. Rupert doesn't believe the distinction means   
   anything,   
   >>meaning if so he's stupider than anyone in my grade school what wasn't in   
   >>special ed, and probably the special ed kids could understand it too.   
   >   
   >Actually, *Goo*, I'm the one who repeatedly assures you it doesn't mean   
   >anything.   
      
       You've never done that Goober. Try doing it now Goo. Go:   
      
   >>>, *Goo*.  But   
   >>>*NONE* ever talk about the philosophical implication of whether or not   
   >>>they "benefited" by "getting to experience life."   
   >>   
   >>    LOL!!! You sure are a stupid Goober to even let that possibility enter   
   your   
   >>stupid little mind Goo, much less outstupid yourself by making such an   
   absurdly   
   >>STUPID claim. LOL...to think that has never been discussed in an elementary   
   >>school is hilarious Goob, especially since we discussed it in some detail.   
   Just   
   >>because you eliminationists can't think about it doesn't mean that most   
   people   
   >>can't you idiot, and in fact from my experience most people CAN, Goo.   
   >   
   >LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   
      
       Most people can Goob. ONLY eliminationists have been unable to do so in my   
   experience, Goo.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)