On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 19:31:40 GMT, Jonathan Ball wrote:

wrote:

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 03:33:15 GMT, Jonathan Ball wrote:


wrote:

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:12:03 -0700, Rat & Swan wrote:



Jonathan Ball wrote:

snip

The whole focus of my argument is that the fundamental flaw in
"veganism" as an ethical response to a perceived ethical problem is
manifold:

- no persuasive elaboration of a *real* ethical problem
requiring a response

As it becomes more and more obvious that most of the animals we
use for food, fiber, leather, and other products share many of
the qualities of humans who are granted rights -- or, as I
believe, whose rights we recognize -- the question becomes, not
why they should have rights, but why their rights are NOT respected.


Ball says:

The whole focus of my argument is that they [veg*ns]
follow their sappy, sentimental superstition to its natural
and logical conclusion."

No, ****WIT, you ****witted inept forger. I never
wrote that sentence.


It's what you meant.

I didn't write it, ****ing queer; you did.
__________________________________________________ _______
From: (Jonathan Ball)
Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animal s,alt.food.vegan
Subject: How Jonathan Ball wants people to feel about the silly arse, ****with
Date: 11 Apr 2002 18:53:15 -0700

People who don't want them to exist should be "vegans". "Vegans"
aren't interested in contributing to lives of any quality for farm
animals: they don't want there to be farm animals.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
__________________________________________________ _______
From: Jonathan Ball
Newsgroups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
Subject: Burger King Uncowed
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 13:23:05 -0700

"vegans" are interested in their influence on animals,
****wit. They want everyone to be "vegan", which would
mean no animals raised for food and other products.
That's an influence, whether you like it or not.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
__________________________________________________ _______
13 Nov 2000 by Jonathan Ball
"They follow their sappy, sentimental superstition to its
natural and logical conclusion."
[That natural and logical conclusion being the elimination
of domestic animals.]
"You invent some arbitrary line and head off in some other
bizarre direction...all by yourself."
[That other bizarre direction being to improve the animals'
welfare instead of to eliminate them.]
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
You cobbled that sentence
together from two sentences I did write.


Since you "ARAs" work together,

I'm not an "ara", and you know it.

I don't know it, and don't believe it.

Stop posting using my name and posting address, ****WIT.