FoodBanter.com - View Single Post - Eating animal products (was: Satan as a Composite Entity/Being?)

Rudy Canoza[_3_]

marques de sade wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:38:18 -0500, dh@. wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:08:38 GMT, (marques de sade) wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:33:55 -0500, dh@. wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 06:26:18 -0800 (PST), wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 24, 3:23 pm, dh@. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I feel that most beef cattle have decent lives of positive value,
>>>>>> also most broiler chickens and their parents, most cage free egg
>>>>>> producers, and most dairy cattle. I feel that billions of them enjoy
>>>>>> decent lives of positive value.-
>>>>> Skimming over this thread. Grabbing this point to reply to.
>>>>>
>>>>> I really don't see how any animal raised for food (excluding organic,
>>>>> free run, etc) could enjoy a 'decent life of positive value'.
>>>> Meaning you are absolutely clueless in that area. Some have
>>>> decent lives and some have terrible lives, so in order to even
>>>> begin to get a realistic interpretation of the situation you would
>>>> have to understand that much.
>>>>
>>>>> First
>>>>> of all, animal producers are making money. How much would it cost
>>>>> them to be sure the animals are comfortable, happy, and well taken
>>>>> care of?
>>>> If dairy cows are not in that position their milk prodution drops.
>>>>
>>>>> Most of these animals are slaughtered by the time they are 2
>>>>> years old.
>>>> Most baby wild animals don't make it that long, not that it
>>>> really matters since it's 2 years (or whatever) or *nothing*
>>> but since there's no entity, then no one suffers from missing out,
>>> right? this is where goo loses you, i think (rightly so).
>> No, that's a really old subject there. Years ago I explained to
>> Rudy I understand the fact that "they" don't pre-exist afawk
>
> well, i just quoted you doing it now... you said it was 2 years or
> nothing, as if there was an entity that is better off experiencing
> 2 years rather than not experiencing anything at all...

You have *exactly* understood where Goo/****wit is
coming from. He's just too stupid to understand all
the implications of what he believes and says.

He believes, as you have caught, that it is better for
farm animals to exist rather than never exist.
*NECESSARILY*, he believes "they" are worse off if they
never exist.

> i'm correcting you and saying that if nothing exists, then there
> is no entity that is worse off than if they existed...
>