General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

[censored]'s lousy trick

Started by [censored] Slater · · Last activity · 4 posts · 480 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
12 January 2004
Last activity
12 January 2004
Original author
[censored] Slater
Posts
4
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
480
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–4 of 4
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. have new enthusiasm for trying to make his lousy trick work. Here's the essence of it.

    1. "vegans" are upset that animals are killed for human consumption (we'll ignore the MASSIVE
    "vegan" hypocrisy in that for a moment, as it has been adequately addressed elsewhere by
    numerous others.)

    2. "vegans" don't eat meat, in order not to contribute to this form of animal death: animals
    deliberately killed by humans in order to consume the animal products. Their goal is to cause
    fewer animals to be bred and raised and slaughtered than would be the case if these people
    consumed animal products.

    half year period shows, that wanting to eliminate farm animals is a morally bad thing. He wants
    to persuade "vegans" that they should stop being "vegans".

    experience life" argument is full of holes, so he does a little switcheroo, thinking no one
    will notice: he cynically suggests that people can have an impact on the lives of animals that
    DO exist, by being so-called "ethical" or "conscientious" consumers. There are three big
    problems with this:

    preaches. He buys meat without regard to the quality of lives of the animals raised to
    produce it. He is a massive hypocrite.

    b. He can't address "vegans'" beliefs about the deliberate killing of farm animals. They feel

    try to persuade them it isn't; he simply offers his own biased belief that it isn't.

    trick! No one is fooled into thinking that

    life of farm animals who DO live; he quite obviously is trying to trick the "vegans" into
    supporting life per se for farm animals.

    in over four years. He's a moron.

    Ray Slather

  2. Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:20:32 GMT, [censored] Slater <[email hidden]> wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    have new enthusiasm for trying to make his lousy trick work. Here's the essence of it.

    1. "vegans" are upset that animals are killed for human consumption (we'll ignore the MASSIVE
    "vegan" hypocrisy in that for a moment, as it has been adequately addressed elsewhere by
    numerous others.)

    2. "vegans" don't eat meat, in order not to contribute to this form of animal death: animals
    deliberately killed by humans in order to consume the animal products. Their goal is to cause
    fewer animals to be bred and raised and slaughtered than would be the case if these people
    consumed animal products.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    half year period shows, that wanting to eliminate farm animals is a morally bad thing. He
    wants to persuade "vegans" that they should stop being "vegans".

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    experience life" argument is full of holes, so he does a little switcheroo, thinking no one
    will notice: he cynically suggests that people can have an impact on the lives of animals that
    DO exist, by being so-called "ethical" or "conscientious" consumers. There are three big
    problems with this:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    preaches. He buys meat without regard to the quality of lives of the animals raised to
    produce it. He is a massive hypocrite.

    b. He can't address "vegans'" beliefs about the deliberate killing of farm animals. They feel

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    try to persuade them it isn't; he simply offers his own biased belief that it isn't.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    trick! No one is fooled into thinking that

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    life of farm animals who DO live; he quite obviously is trying to trick the "vegans" into
    supporting life per se for farm animals.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    in over four years. He's a moron.

    Ray Slather

    Quoted message said:

    wrote it is in great opposition to me pointing out that some types of meat involve less deaths
    than some types of veggies.

    No. I'm in great opposition to your hypocrisy, among other things. Mostly, I'm in great and
    *effective*

    Quoted message said:

    And that people can contribute to decent lives for farm animals with their diet, but they can't do
    it by being veg*n.

    There's the stupid trick again. It will never work.

    What you REALLY want is to try to persuade "vegans" that they ought to eat meat, in order to
    cause more

    trick involves this clumsy shell game of trying to slip in the [censored] about "decent lives", something
    you do not promote yourself.

    Ray Slather

  3. "[censored] Slater" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:20:32 GMT, [censored] Slater


    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    have new enthusiasm for trying to make his lousy trick work. Here's the essence of it.

    1. "vegans" are upset that animals are killed for human consumption (we'll ignore the MASSIVE
    "vegan" hypocrisy in that for a moment, as it has been adequately addressed elsewhere by
    numerous others.)

    2. "vegans" don't eat meat, in order not to contribute to this form of animal death: animals
    deliberately killed by humans in order to consume the animal products. Their goal is to
    cause fewer animals to be bred and raised and slaughtered than would be the case if these
    people consumed animal products.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    half year period shows, that wanting to eliminate farm animals is a morally bad thing. He
    wants to persuade "vegans" that they should stop being "vegans".

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    experience life" argument is full of holes, so he does a little switcheroo, thinking no one
    will notice: he cynically suggests that people can have an impact on the lives of animals
    that DO exist, by being so-called "ethical" or "conscientious" consumers. There are three
    big problems with this:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    preaches. He buys meat without regard to the quality of lives of the animals raised to
    produce it. He is a massive hypocrite.

    b. He can't address "vegans'" beliefs about the deliberate killing of farm animals. They
    feel

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    try to persuade them it isn't; he simply offers his own biased belief that it isn't.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    trick! No one is fooled into thinking that

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    life of farm animals who DO live; he quite obviously is trying to trick the "vegans"
    into supporting life per se for farm animals.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    in over four years. He's a moron.

    Ray Slather

    Quoted message said:

    wrote it is in great opposition to me pointing out that some types of meat involve less deaths
    than some types of veggies.

    No. I'm in great opposition to your hypocrisy, among other things. Mostly, I'm in great and
    *effective*

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    And that people can contribute to decent lives for farm animals with their diet, but they can't
    do it by being veg*n.

    There's the stupid trick again. It will never work.

    What you REALLY want is to try to persuade "vegans" that they ought to eat meat, in order to
    cause more

    Quoted message said:

    trick involves this clumsy shell game of trying to slip in the [censored] about "decent lives",
    something you do not promote yourself.

    Ray Slather

    Will the "real" Jonathan Ball stand up.

    Oh, sorry ~~jonnie~~ You are stood up:-)

  4. Ray said:

    "[censored] Slater" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:20:32 GMT, [censored] Slater

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >have new enthusiasm for trying to make his lousy trick work. Here's the essence of it.
    >
    >1. "vegans" are upset that animals are killed for human consumption (we'll ignore the MASSIVE
    > "vegan" hypocrisy in that for a moment, as it has been adequately addressed elsewhere by
    > numerous others.)
    >
    >2. "vegans" don't eat meat, in order not to contribute to this form of animal death: animals
    > deliberately killed by humans in order to consume the animal products. Their goal is to
    > cause fewer animals to be bred and raised and slaughtered than would be the case if these
    > people consumed animal products.
    >

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > half year period shows, that wanting to eliminate farm animals is a morally bad thing. He
    > wants to persuade "vegans" that they should stop being "vegans".
    >

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > experience life" argument is full of holes, so he does a little switcheroo, thinking no one
    > will notice: he cynically suggests that people can have an impact on the lives of animals
    > that DO exist, by being so-called "ethical" or "conscientious" consumers. There are three big
    > problems with this:
    >

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > preaches. He buys meat without regard to the quality of lives of the animals raised to
    > produce it. He is a massive hypocrite.
    >
    > b. He can't address "vegans'" beliefs about the deliberate killing of farm animals. They
    > feel

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > try to persuade them it isn't; he simply offers his own biased belief that it isn't.
    >

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > trick! No one is fooled into thinking that

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > life of farm animals who DO live; he quite obviously is trying to trick the "vegans" into
    > supporting life per se for farm animals.
    >
    >

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >in over four years. He's a moron.
    >
    >Ray Slather

    wrote it is in great opposition to me pointing out that some types of meat involve less deaths
    than some types of veggies.

    No. I'm in great opposition to your hypocrisy, among other things. Mostly, I'm in great and
    *effective*

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    And that people can contribute to decent lives for farm animals with their diet, but they can't
    do it by being veg*n.

    There's the stupid trick again. It will never work.

    What you REALLY want is to try to persuade "vegans" that they ought to eat meat, in order to
    cause more

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    trick involves this clumsy shell game of trying to slip in the [censored] about "decent lives",
    something you do not promote yourself.

    Ray Slather

    Will the "real" Jonathan Ball stand up.

    Oh, sorry ~~jonnie~~ You are stood up:-)

    Here you go:

    to obtain any degree of 'clue'.

    This will often be in a technical sense, such as 'top posting' to usenet, quoting the entire
    text of a usenet post or email in your reply and adding a few words in response, or continually
    being a complete [censored].

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.