Veganism in a Nutshell

me.kirchhoff said:

I'm not sure how old this is, but I just discovered Bruce Friedrich's "Veganism in a Nutshell" at
brucefriedrich.orgbrucefriedrich.orgOpen ↗

It's old. Here's some background info on the pathetic little nutcase:

Bruce Friedrich

Background PETA’s director of vegan outreach, Bruce Friedrich, nakedly exposes his views -- and
everything else. Arrested in London in July 2001 for streaking Buckingham Palace with the words “go
vegan” painted on his body, Friedrich specializes in confrontation. He threw a glass of water at
London’s visiting mayor in Washington, DC when he didn’t like the mayor’s answer to a question about
pigeon food. Friedrich also spent over a year in prison for attacking an Air Force fighter plane
with a hammer.

Friedrich believes sport hunters should be viewed “with the same revulsion we presently reserve for
Nazi doctors and slave traders.” He spearheads PETA’s absurd “Jesus Was a Vegetarian” campaign.
Friedrich has even denounced teenage animal-rights activists who dare to question the
appropriateness of violent protest.

Timothy McVeigh “should not be allowed to take even one more life,” wrote Friedrich, urging the
terrorist’s warden to serve the condemned prisoner only meatless meals. When McVeigh opted for a
vegetarian “last meal,” Friedrich proclaimed that the mass murderer’s decision to abstain from meat
“groups him with some of the world’s greatest visionaries, including Albert Schweitzer, Gandhi, Leo
Tolstoy and Albert Einstein.”

Quotes "If we really believe that these animals do have the same right to be free from pain and
suffering at our hands, then, of course we’re going to be, as a movement, blowing stuff up and
smashing windows. For the record, I don’t do this stuff, but I do advocate it. I think it’s a great
way to bring about animal liberation … I think it would be a great thing if all of these fast-food
outlets, and these slaughterhouses, and these laboratories, and the banks that fund them exploded
tomorrow. I think it’s perfectly appropriate for people to take bricks and toss them through the
windows, and everything else along the line. Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it."
- “Animal Rights 2001” convention (July 2, 2001)

"[Eating meat] is not your personal decision, any more than, you know, whether somebody beats their
child is their personal decision."
- “Animal Rights 2002” convention (June 29, 2002)

"If you can take Ronald McDonald and turn him into a psychotic, bloody butcher … that’s going to
adversely affect McDonald’s’ stock price."
- “Animal Rights 2002” convention (July 2, 2002)

consumerfreedom.combio detail.cfmOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

Most who've been vegans for some time will already be familiar with the information presented, but
I've found that his succint discussion can be a great way to help friends/family better understand
the vegan lifestyle.

Do you support his PETA terrorist-front organization?

Quoted message said:

There's no copyright on the material, so you can *legally* make copies and distribute them freely.
Good stuff!

It's bad stuff. See: consumerfreedom.comorg detail.cfmOpen ↗

me.kirchhoff said:

I'm not sure how old this is, but I just discovered Bruce Friedrich's "Veganism in a Nutshell" at
brucefriedrich.orgbrucefriedrich.orgOpen ↗

Most who've been vegans for some time will already be familiar with the information presented, but
I've found that his succint discussion can be a great way to help friends/family better understand
the vegan lifestyle. There's no copyright on the material, so you can *legally* make copies and
distribute them freely. Good stuff!

It's worthless and incoherent. Here's just one example, not from the "essay" itself but from his
"question and answer" section. He starts with an introduction, which includes the following:

Please note that none of these questions addresses the fact that meat-eating is the worst thing
you can do for the environment, supports human injustices both in the U.S. and globally, and
harms your own health. Nor do any of these questions address the gratuitous animal abuse on
factory farms and in slaughterhouses.

Then he gets to the first question:

Animals eat one another in nature, so why shouldn’t we eat animals?

His answer does EXACTLY what his introduction says he's not going to address:

Please examine what we do to animals on factory farms and in slaughterhouses, denying animals
everything that is natural to them and then killing them in gruesome ways, and try to tell me
that this is moral.

It's all downhill from there. "veganism" is not a principled ethics, and nothing this semi-terrorist
Friedrich write does anything to invest "veganism" with even a hint of moral principle.

"Essay" is taken from the french "essai", a noun meaning "attempt" or "try". Friedrich's try is a
very bad effort.

"usual suspect" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

me.kirchhoff wrote:

Quoted message said:

Friedrich believes sport hunters should be viewed “with the same revulsion we presently reserve
for Nazi doctors and slave traders.” He spearheads PETA’s absurd “Jesus Was a Vegetarian”
campaign. Friedrich has even denounced teenage animal-rights activists who dare to question the
appropriateness of violent protest.

I used his Jesus was a vegetarian on the TV show I produce-he had a very nice screen presence-and
was nicely done-It was to coincide with the Pope visiting the USA a few years ago. I never met him
personally and those peta people are a bit fanatic for me-in my later years- but the younger crowd
has energy to burn and don't wear furs..ha ha- Michael

usual suspect said:

me.kirchhoff said:

I'm not sure how old this is, but I just discovered Bruce Friedrich's "Veganism in a Nutshell" at
brucefriedrich.orgbrucefriedrich.orgOpen ↗

It's old. Here's some background info on the pathetic little nutcase:

Interesting. The man fights vehemently for what he believes and you label him a "pathetic
little nutcase."

Quoted message said:

Friedrich believes sport hunters should be viewed “with the same revulsion we presently reserve
for Nazi doctors and slave traders.

They prey on the weak, those with no voice of their own. The similarities are there. Killing animals
for "sport" is one of the most execrable acts a human can commit.

Quoted message said:

Timothy McVeigh “should not be allowed to take even one more life,” wrote Friedrich, urging the
terrorist’s warden to serve the condemned prisoner only meatless meals. When McVeigh opted for a
vegetarian “last meal,” Friedrich proclaimed that the mass murderer’s decision to abstain from
meat “groups him with some of the world’s greatest visionaries, including Albert Schweitzer,
Gandhi, Leo Tolstoy and Albert Einstein.”

The fact that a mass murderer like McVeigh might come to understand the hideousness of murder--on
*any* level--is quite remarkable. I question Friedrich's comparison, if the source is accurate,
however. Then again, he tends to be as incendiery as possible whenever possible.

Quoted message said:

Quotes "If we really believe that these animals do have the same right to be free from pain and
suffering at our hands, then, of course we’re going to be, as a movement, blowing stuff up and
smashing windows. For the record, I don’t do this stuff, but I do advocate it. I think it’s a
great way to bring about animal liberation … I think it would be a great thing if all of these fast-
food outlets, and these slaughterhouses, and these laboratories, and the banks that fund them
exploded tomorrow. I think it’s perfectly appropriate for people to take bricks and toss them
through the windows, and everything else along the line. Hallelujah to the people who are willing
to do it." - “Animal Rights 2001” convention (July 2, 2001)

"[Eating meat] is not your personal decision, any more than, you know, whether somebody beats
their child is their personal decision." - “Animal Rights 2002” convention (June 29, 2002)

"If you can take Ronald McDonald and turn him into a psychotic, bloody butcher … that’s going to
adversely affect McDonald’s’ stock price." - “Animal Rights 2002” convention (July 2, 2002)

I don't see how these quotes help your case...

Quoted message said:

Do you support his PETA terrorist-front organization?

Many of the acts by members of groups like ALF are reprehensible, such as placing bombs in
McDonald's restaurants, acts that endanger lives. But many of them are misanthropes who do not
accurately represent the goal of these groups. There are always rogues.

Do I support the clandestine freeing of lab animals from research facilities? Absolutely. Even if
there might be property damage involved? Absolutely. I do not agree with many of the puerile acts
committed by some individuals, such as spray painting obscenities after such incidents; these simply
negatively affect peoples' perceptions of their goals.

Other acts by similar groups, such as the ELF's spiking of old-growth trees, I do not approve of, as
these spikes can cause serious injury to loggers when struck by their chainsaws.

I support political legislation and non-violent protest above all else, but there are times when the
most ethical choice is not necessarily the one complying with the law.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

There's no copyright on the material, so you can *legally* make copies and distribute them
freely. Good stuff!

It's bad stuff. See:

I question many of those claims; they mostly read as spurious jibes from those who fear a group
dedicated wholeheartedly to the welfare of animalkind. Making statements like "well, they only
contribute x% of their funds to y" is ridiculous. This is a group whose sole goal is to raise
awareness and spread activism for the rights of animals. That's like saying to a welfare worker,
"you're bad because you only spend x% of your time helping hispanic families when they need much
more than that." It's the classic 'red herring' line of argumentation, of the most common
fallacies of logic.

I cannot imagine further debate with you to be fruitful. You've clearly decided that the murder of
animals for matters of convenience, tradition, and historical precedence is ethically sound.

I value your arguments, however, as they serve to affirm my values.

--
me.kirchhoff

Michael Balarama said:

Quoted message said:

Friedrich believes sport hunters should be viewed “with the same revulsion we presently reserve
for Nazi doctors and slave traders.” He spearheads PETA’s absurd “Jesus Was a Vegetarian”
campaign. Friedrich has even denounced teenage animal-rights activists who dare to question the
appropriateness of violent protest.

I used his Jesus was a vegetarian on the TV show I produce-he had a very nice screen presence

I think he's very nerdy. I also think his inflammatory rhetoric and open support for violence should
cause sincere and peaceable people to reconsider their support for PETA.

In any event, this is my rebuttal to claims that Jesus was vegetarian and/or pro-AR. It's taken from
my post in aaev/tpa, so pardon some of the remarks in it (like references to Hyland, a liberal
author) and the possible break-up of the formatting.

[I wrote:]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Jesus and his disciples fished and fed people fish. Was that an

example of misuse of animals?

Quoted message said:

[Another poster:]

Quoted message said:

Yes. (Actually, I don't read that Jesus himself fished in person).

[My reply:] Why did he help (or "enable"😉 them?

When he had finished speaking, he said to Simon, "Put out into deep water, and let down the
nets for a catch."

Simon answered, "Master, we've worked hard all night and haven't caught anything. But because
you say so, I will let down the nets."

When they had done so, they caught such a large number of fish that their nets began to break.
So they signaled their partners in the other boat to come and help them, and they came and
filled both boats so full that they began to sink.

When Simon Peter saw this, he fell at Jesus' knees and said, "Go away from me, Lord; I am a
sinful man!" For he and all his companions were astonished at the catch of fish they had
taken... Luke 5:4-9 (cp. John 21 for similar post-resurrection account)

Is the following a misuse of animals? Jesus called his disciples to him and said, "I have compassion
for these people; they have already been with me three days and have nothing to eat. I do not want
to send them away hungry, or they may collapse on the way."

His disciples answered, "Where could we get enough bread in this remote place to feed
such a crowd?"

"How many loaves do you have?" Jesus asked.

"Seven," they replied, "and a few small fish."

He told the crowd to sit down on the ground. Then he took the seven loaves and the fish, and
when he had given thanks, he broke them and gave them to the disciples, and they in turn to the
people. They all ate and were satisfied. Afterward the disciples picked up seven basketfuls of
broken pieces that were left over. -- Mathew 15:32-37

Or how about his eating fish himself? When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. And
while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, "Do you have
anything here to eat?" They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in their
presence. -- Luke 24:40-43

Fact: his disciples weren't ARAs, they were fishermen. Fact: he went out with them. Fact: he told
them where and when to find fish. Fact: he fed fish to others. Fact: he ate fish himself.

Shall we get into the Passover seder?

On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, when it was customary to sacrifice the
Passover lamb, Jesus' disciples asked him, "Where do you want us to go and make preparations
for you to eat the Passover?"

So he sent two of his disciples, telling them, "Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of
water will meet you. Follow him. Say to the owner of the house he enters, 'The Teacher asks:
Where is my guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?' He will show you a
large upper room, furnished and ready. Make preparations for us there."

The disciples left, went into the city and found things just as Jesus had told them. So they
prepared the Passover. -- Mark 14:12-16

Did he forbid the lamb? No. Hyland has a mountain of evidence against his positions on animal
sacrifice. Even if you refuse to accept the fish and lamb, consider the following.

A man with leprosy came to him and begged him on his knees, "If you are willing, you can make
me clean."

Filled with compassion, Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. "I am willing," he
said. "Be clean!" Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cured.

Jesus sent him away at once with a strong warning: "See that you don't tell this to anyone. But
go, show yourself to the priest and offer the sacrifices that Moses commanded for your
cleansing, as a testimony to them." Mark 1:40-44

And why did Mary and Joseph offer sacrifices? Were these in accordance with the Law of Moses
or an abuse?

[end]

Jesus was NOT vegetarian, nor did he do anything consistent with the animal rights or "vegan"
position. People who make such claims pervert the truth for their own agendas. It's not called
"scholarship" when they do that, it's called propaganda. It's disrespectful, disingenuous, and
deceitful. People who want to make positive change in the world -- for their fellow man or for the
beasts -- need to start from a point of honesty.

Quoted message said:

-and was nicely done-It was to coincide with the Pope visiting the USA a few years ago. I never
met him personally and those peta people are a bit fanatic for me-in my later years- but the
younger crowd has energy to burn and don't wear furs..ha ha-

I didn't support PETA for a number of reasons, but I'm in staunch opposition to them since learning
of their connections to ALF-ELF terrorists. Anyone who supports PETA supports terror.

consumerfreedom.comorg detail.cfmOpen ↗

"me.kirchhoff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

usual suspect said:

me.kirchhoff said:

I'm not sure how old this is, but I just discovered Bruce Friedrich's "Veganism in a Nutshell"
at brucefriedrich.orgbrucefriedrich.orgOpen ↗

It's old. Here's some background info on the pathetic little nutcase:

Interesting. The man fights vehemently for what he believes and you label him a "pathetic little
nutcase."

Quoted message said:

Friedrich believes sport hunters should be viewed "with the same revulsion we presently reserve
for Nazi doctors and slave traders.

They prey on the weak, those with no voice of their own. The similarities are there. Killing
animals for "sport" is one of the most execrable acts a human can commit.

=============================
Really? You are really a pathetic nutcase too then. Why is it then that you can contribute to the
death and suffering of millions and millions of animals for your entertainment, but rant about
anybody elses? Your contributions to unnecessary animal death and suffering are just as great, so
where do you have any standing to fault anyone elses life?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Timothy McVeigh "should not be allowed to take even one more life," wrote Friedrich, urging the
terrorist's warden to serve the condemned prisoner only meatless meals. When McVeigh opted for a
vegetarian "last meal," Friedrich proclaimed that the mass murderer's decision to abstain from
meat "groups him with some of the world's greatest visionaries, including Albert Schweitzer,
Gandhi, Leo Tolstoy and Albert Einstein."

The fact that a mass murderer like McVeigh might come to understand the hideousness of murder--on
*any* level--is quite remarkable. I question Friedrich's comparison, if the source is accurate,
however. Then again, he tends to be as incendiery as possible whenever possible.

=================
No, he tends to be a nutcase.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quotes "If we really believe that these animals do have the same right to be free from pain and
suffering at our hands, then, of course we're going to be, as a movement, blowing stuff up and
smashing windows. For the record, I don't do this stuff, but I do advocate it. I think it's a
great way to bring about animal liberation . I think it would be a great thing if all of these
fast-food outlets, and these slaughterhouses, and these laboratories, and the banks that fund
them exploded tomorrow. I think it's perfectly appropriate for people to take bricks and toss
them through the windows, and everything else along the line. Hallelujah to the people who are
willing to do it." - "Animal Rights 2001" convention (July 2, 2001)

"[Eating meat] is not your personal decision, any more than, you know, whether somebody beats
their child is their personal decision." - "Animal Rights 2002" convention (June 29, 2002)

"If you can take Ronald McDonald and turn him into a psychotic, bloody butcher . that's going to
adversely affect McDonald's' stock price." - "Animal Rights 2002" convention (July 2, 2002)

I don't see how these quotes help your case...

Quoted message said:

Do you support his PETA terrorist-front organization?

Many of the acts by members of groups like ALF are reprehensible, such as placing bombs in
McDonald's restaurants, acts that endanger lives. But many of them are misanthropes who do not
accurately represent the goal of these groups. There are always rogues.

======================
Really? yet these groups still provide support for those that take these actions. Why is that if, as
you say, their actions don't represent the goal of those groups?

Quoted message said:

Do I support the clandestine freeing of lab animals from research facilities? Absolutely. Even if
there might be property damage involved? Absolutely.

=======================
Even when it causes the death of those and other animals? Figures? See, it isn't about animals at
all. Animals are just the tools.

I do not agree with

Quoted message said:

many of the puerile acts committed by some individuals, such as spray painting obscenities after
such incidents; these simply negatively affect peoples' perceptions of their goals.

Other acts by similar groups, such as the ELF's spiking of old-growth trees, I do not approve of,
as these spikes can cause serious injury to loggers when struck by their chainsaws.

I support political legislation and non-violent protest above all else, but there are times when
the most ethical choice is not necessarily the one complying with the law.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

There's no copyright on the material, so you can *legally* make copies and distribute them
freely. Good stuff!

It's bad stuff. See:

I question many of those claims; they mostly read as spurious jibes from

those

Quoted message said:

who fear a group dedicated wholeheartedly to the welfare of animalkind.

=======================
ROTFLMAO Like PeTA? the 'e' is lower case in their logo for a reason. You do know that they kill
more animals than they save once they get their bloody hands on them, don't you?

Quoted message said:

Making statements like "well, they only contribute x% of their funds to y" is ridiculous. This is
a group whose sole goal is to raise awareness and spread activism for the rights of animals.
That's like saying to a welfare worker, "you're bad because you only spend x% of your time helping
hispanic families when they need much more than that." It's the classic 'red herring' line of
argumentation, of the most common fallacies of logic.

I cannot imagine further debate with you to be fruitful.

====================
Probably not, your ideology has blinded you to any real facts. Too bad, you could do something to
help animals for real, but then, as long as you have that simple rule for simple minds, you're quite
happy, eh killer?

You've clearly

Quoted message said:

decided that the murder of animals for matters of convenience, tradition, and historical
precedence is ethically sound.

========\
Animals can't be murdered. That's your dogma talking again, hypocrite...

Quoted message said:

I value your arguments, however, as they serve to affirm my values.

================
No, they blow yours out of the water, because you cannot back up any vegan claims that you actually
do anything to help animals.

Quoted message said:

--
me.kirchhoff

rick etter said:

"me.kirchhoff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

usual suspect said:

me.kirchhoff wrote:
> I'm not sure how old this is, but I just discovered Bruce Friedrich's "Veganism in a Nutshell"
> at brucefriedrich.orgbrucefriedrich.orgOpen ↗

It's old. Here's some background info on the pathetic little nutcase:

Interesting. The man fights vehemently for what he believes and you label him a "pathetic little
nutcase."

Quoted message said:

Friedrich believes sport hunters should be viewed "with the same revulsion we presently reserve
for Nazi doctors and slave traders.

They prey on the weak, those with no voice of their own. The similarities are there. Killing
animals for "sport" is one of the most execrable acts a human can commit.

=============================
Really? You are really a pathetic nutcase too then. Why is it then that you can contribute to the
death and suffering of millions and millions of animals for your entertainment, but rant about
anybody elses? Your contributions to unnecessary animal death and suffering are just as great, so
where do you have any standing to fault anyone elses life?

Wow, you really *don't* get it, do you? How difficult is it to understand the fundamental, critical
difference between a lifestyle *based* on the murder of animals and one *based* on the belief that
intentionally killing animals and eating their flesh is unethical? Anti-vegans sadly fall back on
the tired argument that a vegan lifestyle results in as many deaths as omnivorous ones without
understanding the basic ethical difference at stake. I won't touch your slanderous statement.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Timothy McVeigh "should not be allowed to take even one more life," wrote Friedrich, urging the
terrorist's warden to serve the condemned prisoner only meatless meals. When McVeigh opted for
a vegetarian "last meal," Friedrich proclaimed that the mass murderer's decision to abstain
from meat "groups him with some of the world's greatest visionaries, including Albert
Schweitzer, Gandhi, Leo Tolstoy and Albert Einstein."

The fact that a mass murderer like McVeigh might come to understand the hideousness of murder--on
*any* level--is quite remarkable. I question Friedrich's comparison, if the source is accurate,
however. Then again, he tends to be as incendiery as possible whenever possible.

=================
No, he tends to be a nutcase.

More useless ad hominem attacks.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quotes "If we really believe that these animals do have the same right to be free from pain and
suffering at our hands, then, of course we're going to be, as a movement, blowing stuff up and
smashing windows. For the record, I don't do this stuff, but I do advocate it. I think it's a
great way to bring about animal liberation . I think it would be a great thing if all of these
fast-food outlets, and these slaughterhouses, and these laboratories, and the banks that fund
them exploded tomorrow. I think it's perfectly appropriate for people to take bricks and toss
them through the windows, and everything else along the line. Hallelujah to the people who are
willing to do it." - "Animal Rights 2001" convention (July 2, 2001)

"[Eating meat] is not your personal decision, any more than, you know, whether somebody beats
their child is their personal decision."
- "Animal Rights 2002" convention (June 29, 2002)

"If you can take Ronald McDonald and turn him into a psychotic, bloody butcher . that's going
to adversely affect McDonald's' stock price." - "Animal Rights 2002" convention (July 2, 2002)

I don't see how these quotes help your case...

Quoted message said:

Do you support his PETA terrorist-front organization?

Many of the acts by members of groups like ALF are reprehensible, such as placing bombs in
McDonald's restaurants, acts that endanger lives. But many of them are misanthropes who do not
accurately represent the goal of these groups. There are always rogues.

======================
Really? yet these groups still provide support for those that take these actions. Why is that if,
as you say, their actions don't represent the goal of those groups?

Again, they support the ELF, not necessarily an extremist who goes too far. The difference is clear.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Do I support the clandestine freeing of lab animals from research facilities? Absolutely. Even if
there might be property damage involved? Absolutely.

=======================
Even when it causes the death of those and other animals? Figures? See, it isn't about animals at
all. Animals are just the tools.

Unfortunately, deaths will occur. But the intent is to free these animals from hideous environments
in which they will be killed if no action is taken. Your argument, again, is fundamentally
fallacious.

Quoted message said:

I do not agree with

Quoted message said:

many of the puerile acts committed by some individuals, such as spray painting obscenities after
such incidents; these simply negatively affect peoples' perceptions of their goals.

Other acts by similar groups, such as the ELF's spiking of old-growth trees, I do not approve of,
as these spikes can cause serious injury to loggers when struck by their chainsaws.

I support political legislation and non-violent protest above all else, but there are times when
the most ethical choice is not necessarily the one complying with the law.

Quoted message said:

> There's no copyright on the material, so you can *legally* make copies and distribute them
> freely. Good stuff!

It's bad stuff. See:

I question many of those claims; they mostly read as spurious jibes from

those

Quoted message said:

who fear a group dedicated wholeheartedly to the welfare of animalkind.

=======================
ROTFLMAO Like PeTA? the 'e' is lower case in their logo for a reason. You do know that they kill
more animals than they save once they get their bloody hands on them, don't you?

Again, you're making little sense. PeTA's goal is to raise awareness and increase activism for
animal rights. You make it sound as though their goal is to kill as many animals as possible.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Making statements like "well, they only contribute x% of their funds to y" is ridiculous. This is
a group whose sole goal is to raise awareness and spread activism for the rights of animals.
That's like saying to a welfare worker, "you're bad because you only spend x% of your time
helping hispanic families when they need much more than that." It's the classic 'red herring'
line of argumentation, of the most common fallacies of logic.

I cannot imagine further debate with you to be fruitful.

====================
Probably not, your ideology has blinded you to any real facts. Too bad, you could do something to
help animals for real, but then, as long as you have that simple rule for simple minds, you're
quite happy, eh killer?

Funny, I would say that your "facts" have blinded you from taking any sort of ethical stance. I
suppose that by eating meat I would helping animals? Yet again, your logic is faulty. And, yes, I am
quite happy knowing that I have dedicated my life to helping the world's oppressed, whether it be
animals or humans.

Quoted message said:

You've clearly

Quoted message said:

decided that the murder of animals for matters of convenience, tradition, and historical
precedence is ethically sound.

========\
Animals can't be murdered. That's your dogma talking again, hypocrite...

Killed. Murdered. Shot to death. It's semantics. Take your pick.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I value your arguments, however, as they serve to affirm my values.

================
No, they blow yours out of the water, because you cannot back up any vegan claims that you
actually do anything to help animals.

I have personally rescued animals facing certain death who will now live out their lives in peace.
What have you done? I you have actually done anything to contribute to the welfare of animals, I
applaud you.

--
me.kirchhoff

"me.kirchhoff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

rick etter said:

"me.kirchhoff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 09:58:40 -0500, usual suspect wrote:

> me.kirchhoff wrote:
>> I'm not sure how old this is, but I just discovered Bruce Friedrich's "Veganism in a
>> Nutshell" at brucefriedrich.orgbrucefriedrich.orgOpen ↗
>
> It's old. Here's some background info on the pathetic little nutcase:

Interesting. The man fights vehemently for what he believes and you label him a "pathetic
little nutcase."

> Friedrich believes sport hunters should be viewed "with the same revulsion we presently
> reserve for Nazi doctors and slave traders.

They prey on the weak, those with no voice of their own. The similarities are there. Killing
animals for "sport" is one of the most execrable acts a human can commit.

=============================
Really? You are really a pathetic nutcase too then. Why is it then that you can contribute to
the death and suffering of millions and millions of animals for your entertainment, but rant
about anybody elses? Your contributions to unnecessary animal death and suffering are just as
great, so where do you have any standing to fault anyone elses life?

Wow, you really *don't* get it, do you?

--------------------------
And you really are delusional about your lifestyle, aren't you?

How difficult is it to understand

Quoted message said:

the fundamental, critical difference between a lifestyle *based* on the murder of animals and one
*based* on the belief that intentionally killing animals and eating their flesh is unethical?

============================
That's something that you haven't proven. Animals are intentionally killed for your veggies. Why is
it ethical to kill animals and let them rot? Your diet causes more death and suffering than some
meat included diets. How is it 'ethical' to kill more, and still be so sanctimoniously smug and
hypocritical?

Anti-vegans sadly

Quoted message said:

fall back on the tired argument that a vegan lifestyle results in as many deaths as omnivorous
ones without understanding the basic ethical difference at stake. I won't touch your slanderous
statement.

======================
Because you can't. You cannot defend the death and suffering you cause despite the fact that you
could cause less.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Timothy McVeigh "should not be allowed to take even one more life," wrote Friedrich, urging
> the terrorist's warden to serve the condemned prisoner only meatless meals. When McVeigh
> opted for a vegetarian "last meal," Friedrich proclaimed that the mass murderer's decision to
> abstain from meat "groups him with some of the world's greatest visionaries, including Albert
> Schweitzer, Gandhi, Leo Tolstoy and Albert Einstein."

The fact that a mass murderer like McVeigh might come to understand the hideousness of murder--
on *any* level--is quite remarkable. I question Friedrich's comparison, if the source is
accurate, however. Then again, he tends to be as incendiery as possible whenever possible.

=================
No, he tends to be a nutcase.

More useless ad hominem attacks.

==================
LOL can't refute that either, I see.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Quotes "If we really believe that these animals do have the same right to be free from pain
> and suffering at our hands, then, of course we're going to be, as a movement, blowing stuff
> up and smashing windows. For the record, I don't do this stuff, but I do advocate it. I think
> it's a great way to bring about animal liberation . I think it would be a great thing if all
> of these fast-food outlets, and these slaughterhouses, and these laboratories, and the banks
> that fund them exploded tomorrow. I think it's perfectly appropriate for people to take
> bricks and toss them through the windows, and everything else along the line. Hallelujah to
> the people who are willing to do it." - "Animal Rights 2001" convention (July 2, 2001)
>
> "[Eating meat] is not your personal decision, any more than, you know, whether somebody beats
> their child is their personal decision."
> - "Animal Rights 2002" convention (June 29, 2002)
>
> "If you can take Ronald McDonald and turn him into a psychotic, bloody butcher . that's going
> to adversely affect McDonald's' stock price." - "Animal Rights 2002" convention (July 2,
> 2002)

I don't see how these quotes help your case...

> Do you support his PETA terrorist-front organization?

Many of the acts by members of groups like ALF are reprehensible, such as placing bombs in
McDonald's restaurants, acts that endanger lives. But many of them are misanthropes who do not
accurately represent the goal of these groups. There are always rogues.

======================
Really? yet these groups still provide support for those that take these actions. Why is that
if, as you say, their actions don't represent the goal of those groups?

Again, they support the ELF, not necessarily an extremist who goes too far. The difference
is clear.

======================
No, they support individuals that been caught perpetrating these crimes. The differences aren't
there. They support terrorists.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Do I support the clandestine freeing of lab animals from research facilities? Absolutely. Even
if there might be property damage involved? Absolutely.

=======================
Even when it causes the death of those and other animals? Figures? See, it isn't about animals
at all. Animals are just the tools.

Unfortunately, deaths will occur. But the intent is to free these animals from hideous
environments in which they will be killed if no action is taken. Your argument, again, is
fundamentally fallacious.

\================= No, it's your excuses for the death and suffering you cause that is hypocritical.
Animals are intentionally killed to provide you with cheap, convenient veggies.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I do not agree with

Quoted message said:

many of the puerile acts committed by some individuals, such as spray painting obscenities
after such incidents; these simply negatively affect peoples' perceptions of their goals.

Other acts by similar groups, such as the ELF's spiking of old-growth trees, I do not approve
of, as these spikes can cause serious injury to loggers when struck by their chainsaws.

I support political legislation and non-violent protest above all else, but there are times
when the most ethical choice is not necessarily the one complying with the law.

>> There's no copyright on the material, so you can *legally* make copies and distribute them
>> freely. Good stuff!
>
> It's bad stuff. See:

I question many of those claims; they mostly read as spurious jibes from

those

Quoted message said:

who fear a group dedicated wholeheartedly to the welfare of animalkind.

=======================
ROTFLMAO Like PeTA? the 'e' is lower case in their logo for a reason. You do know that they kill
more animals than they save once they get their bloody hands on them, don't you?

Again, you're making little sense. PeTA's goal is to raise awareness and increase activism for
animal rights. You make it sound as though their goal is to kill as many animals as possible.

===========================
Just stating the facts. look them up if you dare. Once PeTA gets their hands on an animal, they are
more then likely to kill it than to save it. Of course, while they do have it, they will milk the
rubes for all the donations they can, once those fall off...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Making statements like "well, they only contribute x% of their funds to y" is ridiculous. This
is a group whose sole goal is to raise awareness and spread activism for the rights of animals.
That's like saying to a welfare worker, "you're bad because you only spend x% of your time
helping hispanic families when they need much more than that." It's the classic 'red herring'
line of argumentation, of the most common fallacies of logic.

I cannot imagine further debate with you to be fruitful.

====================
Probably not, your ideology has blinded you to any real facts. Too bad, you could do something to
help animals for real, but then, as long as you have that simple rule for simple minds, you're
quite happy, eh killer?

Funny, I would say that your "facts" have blinded you from taking any sort of ethical stance. I
suppose that by eating meat I would helping animals?

========================
yes. It's your categorical statements about meat that are ignorant and inane. I'm sure you don't
even make choices among you own foods depending on which ones cause more or less death and
suffering. There are meats that cause far less death and suffering than almost any crop you care to
mention. You don't make real choices because you have the simple rule that not eating meat means
no/less/fewer animals die. Unfortunately for the animals, that's not always the case. But then, you
don't care about that because animals are just the tools of your religion.

Yet again, your logic is faulty. And, yes, I am quite happy

Quoted message said:

knowing that I have dedicated my life to helping the world's oppressed, whether it be animals
or humans.

========================
ROTFLMAO You really are that insane, aren't you? So, how many animals died for this inane little
post of yours? Enjoying your entertainment?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You've clearly

Quoted message said:

decided that the murder of animals for matters of convenience, tradition, and historical
precedence is ethically sound.

========\
Animals can't be murdered. That's your dogma talking again, hypocrite...

Killed. Murdered. Shot to death. It's semantics. Take your pick.

=======================
No, it's an emotive bit of gimmickery. It's all vegans have since they cannot prove their idiotic
claims of saving animals.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I value your arguments, however, as they serve to affirm my values.

================
No, they blow yours out of the water, because you cannot back up any vegan claims that you
actually do anything to help animals.

I have personally rescued animals facing certain death who will now live out their lives in peace.
What have you done? I you have actually done anything to contribute to the welfare of animals, I
applaud you.

===========================
Well whoopi. We have dogs rescued from shelters too. But that doesn't address the hypocrisy of you
dietary claims.

Quoted message said:

--
me.kirchhoff

Has anyone ever bothered to ask the cow, "how much do you value your life." no, because you can't.
Does it not bleed? We can only speculate that the cow or the chicken desires to live as much as we
do. We have no means to determine it's conciousness. All the anti-vegan's out there, you know who
you are, are the biggest !#$%^ worthless dumbasses around. (See who replies first) Enjoy your fat
colon polyps and your anger, may your liver fail sooner than later. Have fun being a blocked
vegetarian and please continue to make up excuses for your choices. Let's call it .. hmm population
control. I can no longer read the remarks from the closed minded football-loving flesh eaters. It's
a waste of time fellow vegans. Let us be at peace with our decision to not justify the suffering of
animals . Let the rest die.

M

"Mike Wood" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Has anyone ever bothered to ask the cow, "how much do you value your

life."

Quoted message said:

no, because you can't.

==========================
have you never bothered to ask the millions of mammals, reptiles, birds, fish, and amphibians that
die for you food if they 'value' their lives? Why not?

Does it not bleed?
=====================
Don't yours? Well, actually, not all of them that you can see. See, the ones you poison just sort of
have their guts turn to mush over several days of painful sufferinging. So, I guess they don't count
to you since you don't see them blled, eh killer?

We can only speculate that the cow

Quoted message said:

or the chicken desires to live as much as we do. We have no means to determine it's
conciousness. All the anti-vegan's out there, you know who you are, are the biggest !#$%^
worthless dumbasses around.

================================
Vegans, of course. Because despite their claims of 'saving' animals, they do not. And they cannot
prove that they do.

(See who replies

Quoted message said:

first) Enjoy your fat colon polyps and your anger, may your liver fail sooner than later.

======================
Ah yes, the well known vegan compassion for all living things.

Have fun being a blocked vegetarian and please continue

Quoted message said:

to make up excuses for your choices. Let's call it .. hmm population control. I can no longer read
the remarks from the closed minded

======================
That's vegans described to a tee, hypocrite.

Quoted message said:

football-loving flesh eaters. It's a waste of time fellow vegans. Let us be at peace with our
decision to not justify the suffering of animals .

Let

Quoted message said:

the rest die.
========================

ROTFLMAO Obviously you are not at piece with your false relegion of veganism, hince your hatred of
others. Animals are just the tools of your hatred. You prove that with each and every ignorant post
to usenet, killer.

Now, go have a nice blood-drenched breakfast, hypocrite.

Quoted message said:

M

Mike Wood said:

Has anyone ever bothered to ask the cow, "how much do you value your life."

Cows don't speak English.

Quoted message said:

no, because you can't.

Wrong. I can ask. The cow just won't get it.

Quoted message said:

Does it not bleed?

If it's wounded.

Quoted message said:

We can only speculate that the cow or the chicken desires to live as much as we do.

Why would we speculate about such things? Do you not have a life?

Quoted message said:

We have no means to determine it's conciousness.

Yes, we do.

Quoted message said:

All the anti-vegan's out there, you know who you are, are the biggest !#$%^ worthless
dumbasses around.

Why do you say that?

Quoted message said:

(See who replies first)

Rick did.

Quoted message said:

Enjoy your fat colon polyps and your anger,

What about yours? And why do you feign so much compassion for animals when you hate your fellow man
enough to wish him cancer and liver failure?

Quoted message said:

may your liver fail sooner than later.

Feel the love. Why are "vegans" such misanthropes?

Quoted message said:

Have fun being a blocked vegetarian

A what?

Quoted message said:

and please continue to make up excuses for your choices.

Rational people don't make up excuses for their dietary choices. Vegans do. VeganISM is an
eating disorder.

Quoted message said:

Let's call it .. hmm population control.

No, let's call it misanthropy. Why do you hate your fellow man so much?

Quoted message said:

I can no longer read the remarks from the closed minded

vegans...

Quoted message said:

football-loving

Oh yeah, you hate *real* men. Has all that soy has feminized you, numbnuts?

Quoted message said:

flesh eaters.

Your diet kills more animals. Go eat your bloody tofu.

Quoted message said:

It's a waste of time fellow vegans. Let us be at peace with our decision to not justify the
suffering of animals.

Your diet causes death and harm to many more animals than are slaughtered for meat. Your clothing is
also responsible for animal suffering and death. Your entire existence is filled with crippled,
poisoned, and dead little animals.

Quoted message said:

Let the rest die.

You're a misanthrope. You hate animals, but you hate man even more.

ouch I'm crying.

"rick etter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Mike Wood" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
berlin.de...

Quoted message said:

Has anyone ever bothered to ask the cow, "how much do you value your

life."

Quoted message said:

no, because you can't.

==========================
have you never bothered to ask the millions of mammals, reptiles, birds, fish, and amphibians that
die for you food if they 'value' their lives? Why not?

What mammals and birds and fish are you talking about?

Quoted message said:

Does it not bleed?
=====================
Don't yours? Well, actually, not all of them that you can see. See, the ones you poison just sort
of have their guts turn to mush over several

days

Quoted message said:

of painful sufferinging. So, I guess they don't count to you since you don't see them blled,
eh killer?

Are you takling about microorganisms? or what? plants? Oh no, are you arent one of those Breath-a-
tarians. You're gonna die, dude. 22 days max. Of course somethings got to die.

Quoted message said:

We can only speculate that the cow

Quoted message said:

or the chicken desires to live as much as we do. We have no means to determine it's
conciousness. All the anti-vegan's out there, you know

who

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

you are, are the biggest !#$%^ worthless dumbasses around.

================================
Vegans, of course. Because despite their claims of 'saving' animals, they do not. And they cannot
prove that they do.

That's the stupidest thing I think I've ever heard.

Quoted message said:

(See who replies

Quoted message said:

first) Enjoy your fat colon polyps and your anger, may your liver fail sooner than later.

======================
Ah yes, the well known vegan compassion for all living things.

Who the hell said I had compassion, Vegan itself just means i don't eat anything that took a
[censored]. C'mon.

Quoted message said:

Have fun being a blocked vegetarian and please continue

Quoted message said:

to make up excuses for your choices. Let's call it .. hmm population control. I can no longer
read the remarks from the closed minded

======================
That's vegans described to a tee, hypocrite.

Quoted message said:

football-loving flesh eaters. It's a waste of time fellow vegans. Let

us

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be at peace with our decision to not justify the suffering of animals .

Let

Quoted message said:

the rest die.
========================

ROTFLMAO Obviously you are not at piece with your false relegion of veganism, hince your hatred of
others. Animals are just the tools of your hatred. You prove that with each and every ignorant
post to usenet,

killer.

oooh I'm ingorant. oh no

You are another fine example of what I call "Sheeple"

Quoted message said:

Now, go have a nice blood-drenched breakfast, hypocrite.

Diet for a Small Planet. read it.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

M

"Mike Wood" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

ouch I'm crying.

=====================
You should be, if you really cared about animals. But then, your continued posting to usenet proves
that that is *not* a concern of yours.

Quoted message said:

"rick etter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Mike Wood" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
berlin.de...

Quoted message said:

Has anyone ever bothered to ask the cow, "how much do you value your

life."

Quoted message said:

no, because you can't.

==========================
have you never bothered to ask the millions of mammals, reptiles, birds, fish, and amphibians
that die for you food if they 'value' their lives? Why not?

What mammals and birds and fish are you talking about?

----------------------
Rabbits, voles, mice, rats, an occasional fawn.. Birds, you know, those things that fly around the
sky? Fish, you know, those wet wiggly things that swim is streams and lakes... millions and millions
of them just to bring you your selfish, conveninet veggies, killer. I guess you just filled the
quota for being usenets "...biggest !#$%^ worthless dumbasses around...", huh?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Does it not bleed?
=====================
Don't yours? Well, actually, not all of them that you can see. See,

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ones you poison just sort of have their guts turn to mush over several

days

Quoted message said:

of painful sufferinging. So, I guess they don't count to you since you don't see them blled, eh
killer?

Are you takling about microorganisms?

=====================
No.

or what? plants?
=================
No.

Quoted message said:

Oh no, are you arent one of those Breath-a-tarians. You're gonna die,

dude.

Quoted message said:

22 days max. Of course somethings got to die.

====================
And you plan on making it as many other animals as possible until your time, eh killer? Your diet
will see to that, because you give no thought to how you cause the death and suffering of animals.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

We can only speculate that the cow

Quoted message said:

or the chicken desires to live as much as we do. We have no means to determine it's
conciousness. All the anti-vegan's out there, you know

who

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

you are, are the biggest !#$%^ worthless dumbasses around.

================================
Vegans, of course. Because despite their claims of 'saving' animals,

they

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

do not. And they cannot prove that they do.

That's the stupidest thing I think I've ever heard.

======================
Then prove the claim, stupid. Should be easy for an intellectual like you, eh killer? Prove that
veganism automatically causes no/less/fewer animal deaths and suffering. Nobody has in the years
I've been asking, maybe you'll get lucky and become the AR/vegan dream child.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(See who replies

Quoted message said:

first) Enjoy your fat colon polyps and your anger, may your liver fail sooner than later.

======================
Ah yes, the well known vegan compassion for all living things.

Who the hell said I had compassion, Vegan itself just means i don't eat anything that took a
[censored]. C'mon.

======================
No stupid, veganism is not a diet. Better look up the terms before you start slinging your ignorance
around for all to see. And, if it's not for 'compassion', then why the diet? And, if it's not for
compassion, why all the hatred and vitriol for those that do eat meat?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Have fun being a blocked vegetarian and please continue

Quoted message said:

to make up excuses for your choices. Let's call it .. hmm population control. I can no longer
read the remarks from the closed minded

======================
That's vegans described to a tee, hypocrite.

Quoted message said:

football-loving flesh eaters. It's a waste of time fellow vegans.

Let

Quoted message said:

us

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be at peace with our decision to not justify the suffering of animals

.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Let

Quoted message said:

the rest die.
========================

ROTFLMAO Obviously you are not at piece with your false relegion of veganism, hince your hatred
of others. Animals are just the tools of

your

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

hatred. You prove that with each and every ignorant post to usenet,

killer.

oooh I'm ingorant. oh no

=====================
Yes, you prove that with each post, stupid.

Quoted message said:

You are another fine example of what I call "Sheeple"

====================
ROTFLMAO This from someone who doesn't have anything to defend their 'diet' except what's he's seen
others write for him. You really are a hhot there killer.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Now, go have a nice blood-drenched breakfast, hypocrite.

Diet for a Small Planet. read it.

=================
Maybe you should read something that isn't propaganda, killer. Crop production, power generation,
distribution, and communications, look them up...if you dare, killer.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

M