suppository wrote:
>>>first of all eating vegan DOES help animals because it decreases demand
>>>for meat.
>>
>>No, it doesn't. Vegans constitute a very tiny minority, at least in the
>>developed nations of the world, and their dietary habits have negligible
>>influence on the lives of farm animals.
>
> Then this is EXACTLY the reason we need FAR MORE vegans --

It won't change a thing.

> so they WILL have a bigger impact on the lives of farm animals.
> Each vegan is STILL saving the life of a dozen cows, a few hundred
> chickens, and tens of pigs in their lifetime by being vegan than
> eating
> meat.

No it won't. You apparently don't understand that it's not zero-sum.
Those animals not eaten by each vegan are still used for other purposes,
ranging from petfood to tires and so on.

> Secondly, if vegans or vegetarians constitute such a small minority,
> then you have absolutely NOTHING to complain about.

I'm not complaining. I've only pointed out that veg-ns make no
difference in the quality of animal lives despite their posturing.

>>chosen to play an either-or game rather than support humane ranching
>>does nothing to help the plight of any animal.
>
> You are the one who is a fundamentalist anti-vegan religious fanatic
> who absolutely wants the whole world to exclude the third option
> of not eating the animals in the first place.

Listen, asshole, I don't eat animals. At all. Nor do I consume dairy or
eggs. If your intention is to improve the lives of animals, you will
consume products that are consistent with such quality. Avoiding all
animal products, for the reasons you state, results in the status quo.
You're not part of the demand, so there's no reason to supply it. You're
the one who should stop complaining about the treatment of farm animals.
Why should a rancher cater to the demands of someone who's withdrawn
from the market?

>>No shit, Sherlock. It is a radical political act.
>
> No, Gary had it right. Veganism is just an matter of eating.

Do you wear leather? Do you wear fur? For or against rodeos, circuses,
animal testing?

> Unlike you in the pro-meat religion,

What pro-meat religion? How about calling me pro-choice: I believe
people should be free to eat whatever they want as long as it's not
stolen. You're the anti-choice fanatic, seeking to both deny others
freedom and force your will upon them.

> vegans happen to take into
> account
> the consequences of ALL their buying habits.

Which is why it is about much more than eating, asshole.

> So, they may consider
> things which have nothing to do with veganism
> (e.g. animals in entertainment).

Consider? No! They reject that.

>>Yes, a sheltered and peculiar act of self-marginalization.
>
> Lies and bullshit, from someone who has never seen the real world.

I beg to differ, particularly as I'recently returned from a three-week
vacation in what's considered a third-world nation. I've seen a lot more
of the world -- the real one -- than you ever will.

>>This doesn't make it a way of life. Others, who are not vegan, are free
>>to support animal welfare programs and agencies --
>
> Hypocritical bullshit.

What's hypocritical about what I wrote, Einstein?

> If you don't happen to support the work or
> philosophy of a particular charitable organization, like PETA,

PETA are not a charitable organization. They are a group of political
activists.

> you call their philosophy a "way of life" or "a religion".

Unlike you, I'm reserved when it comes to throwing out the charge of
religion. "Way of life" and "philosophy" are terms used by vegans and
other fellow travelers, and I think they're sufficient.

> Hunting and those in the slaughterhouse business are the ones who
> are sheltered in their overly protected and unseen world by ultra-
> conservative politicians.

Go ahead and cede the point that your political point of view is shared
by other vegans. You cannot partake in veganISM without being a leftist.

> They, like Frank Purdue, make slaughtering
> animals their entire life's work, never thinking of other
> possibilities
> for a REAL job.

Your ancestors no doubt considered such work a real job.

>>Veganism has nothing to do with the welfare of animals and everything to
>>do with an anti-capitalist political philosophy which has been rejected
>>in nearly every nation where it's been tried.
>
> More insane bullshit lies. There is no more anti-capitalism in
> animal rights philosophy than in any other philosophy.

Your opposition to legitimate and wanted businesses above shows that
you're the one lying and full of bullshit. AR is anti-capitalist to its
core. The great irony is that many vegan shoppers purchase from
entrepeneurs -- many of whom do not share the same zeal, or even same
sense of aesthetics (diet, etc), but only want to make a buck by niche
marketing. I love free markets.

<snip>
> If the pro-meat fanatics were so "pro-capitalist", then would
> come out STRONGLY in favor of legalizing ALL drugs and ALL
> pornography.

Non-sequiturs.

> Those are businesses which don't hurt anybody --- nobody FORCES
> you to smoke pot or look at porn -- and which have been unfairly
> crippled by anti-drug and anti-porn zealots.

I'm for decriminalization of marijuana, but I strongly advocate that
individuals not get involved with recreational drugs. Dope doesn't
improve one's quality of life, except in certain medical situations and
even then the data are inconclusive. Those situations are unfairly used
as red herrings by pro-dope activists, who masquerade as humanitarians
when they only want legitimacy for their vices. Fine. Just make sure DUI
laws are enforced to protect those of us who don't need mind-altering
crutches to deal with life.

I do take exception, though, about your assertions about harm done by
drugs and pornography. Abusing one's body with drugs is an escape from
reality -- and you accuse me of being out of touch with the real world.

You may like to jack off to your porn, but the women who are shown are
often not (or almost always under-) compensated, often abused, and in
many cases very emotionally unstable. I know that doesn't matter to you
since they're not animals and you have your nut to crack.

Porn also affects relationships, and most often deleteriously. You find
it easier to wank to a video or a magazine than to build a relationship.
Your rampant engagement in self-pleasure is selfish, so you're
increasingly less concerned about finding satisfaction from your spouse
or significant other. You judge others by what you fill your mind with,
even though they're cosmetically-enhanced.

It's not a good thing at all.

http://www.obscenitycrimes.org/laydenhealthy.cfm

> But, naturally, pro-meat fanatics will not do that, it does not
> directly benefit THEM. Like all religious fanatics, anti-vegetarian
> cultists are concerned with general ideals like "capitalism"
> and "freedom" being applied ONLY in favor of THEIR business.

Again, I don't eat meat. You're not making a rational case in any event.

> Anti-veganism and anti-animal rights religions have absolutely NOTHING
> to do with human rights. They can say they are for human rights the
> same way Joseph Stalin was for his human right to murder millions of
> Russians or the Spanish Inquisition was for their human rights to
> torture non-Christians. Needlessly torturing animals
> is the only "human right" the anti-vegans care about.

Non-sequitur. Did you smoke some of your dope as you wrote this?

> The anti-animal fanatics whine and complain about being forced not
> to eat meat. Yet they FORCE BILLIONS of animals to be born, kept in
> crates their whole lives, tortured and then murdered
> illegally because these cults do not obey even the most
> lax animal-slaughter laws.

What animals are kept in crates? What animals are tortured or even
"murdered illegally"?

> They show their true anti-human colors when they force only THEIR
> opinions to be heard in public schools, on tv, on radio, in
> newspapers.

Huh? You have every bit of access to media outlets as meat companies and
industry groups.

> The pro-meat-industry cults violently stop pro-vegetarian groups from
> airing THEIR points of view,

Name any such act of violence by the meat industry. Shall I repost all
the ALF/ELF terror acts from last month? Let's see, they put acid on a
chef's car, flooded his shop (and adjacent ones), released mink into the
wild wherein the mink ate pets and livestock, firebombed a research
facility, etc. Seems like you've confused to two sides in this debate.

> from promoting vegetarian diets in
> schools,

What children eat should be between their parents and the schools, not
activist organizations.

> while forcing THEIR advertisements

Advertisements are not forced, they're paid for with cash. Maybe you did
not know that.

> and THEIR products everywhere.

Products are placed where they will sell. Why are there so few vegan
stores and restaurants? Because there are so few vegan shoppers and diners.

>>Actually, it IS true. Animals with economic value are treated better
>>than animals with no economic value. You ignore this point when shocking
>>yourself and friends with PETA propaganda pamphlets, but visit a farm
>>for yourself and see how animals are treated.
>
> This statement shows how deeply entrenched the stupidity and lack
> of brains the anti-animal rights cult in our country is. They could
> take a trip to China and claim that every single Chinaman is happy
> because they see nobody in prison or on in a slave camp or being
> executed.

Non-sequitur. Lay off the bong.

> So then why do slaughterhouses and meat-packing plants violently

Examples of violence?

> and illegally stop PETA and any other animal-rights groups from
> videotaping

Whoa, what is illegal about stopping someone from doing something on my
property? Do PETA and other AR groups have a legal right to be on
private property?

> and recording the truth about all your alleged humane conditions?

I've never said inhumane conditions do not exist, but that they're rare
and isolated. If PETA or anyone else is aware of an atrocity, it should
be reported to law enforcement. PETA are not policemen.

> Perhaps a few have, but for your argument to make even a BIT of sense,
> ALL of them would have to.

Many farmers and ranchers allow media access to their property. Of
course, the media often *ask* permission. Activists are not journalists,
and they have no interest in truth -- especially when it's at odds with
their agenda. Yes, activists have agendas.

If I ran a farm, I wouldn't allow access to my operation to someone
whose mission in life was to shut me down. **** that. If someone wanted
to see what we do and how we treat our animals, fine. I'd show them
everything they wanted to see.

>>Sick animals don't gain weight,
>
> Care to prove your wild accusation that if the meat-industry were
> shut down, how sick animals would be born in the first place?

It's not a wild accusation, asshole. Why are you so intent in closing
down farms and ranches and denying people the food they want to eat?

>>Even veal calves, long the poster-animals of benighted zealots like
>>yourself, are not kept in crates in the US. "The vast majority of
>>animals raised for meat" in fact have sufficient range to move.
>>Confinement is the exception, though it does have some merit: it
>
> YOU ADMITTED IT!! YOU ADMITTED that confinement occurs!
> Of course, you added the lie that it is "the exception".

It is the exception, fool.

> You and the entire pro-meat cult religion are ENTIRELY discredited.

By whom, lol?

> Democracy in this country is founded on TRUTH,

Then you should stop lying. If you're for democracy, why are you -- the
minority -- intent on preventing the majority from exercising the
freedom to choose food based on personal preference? You are not a
democrat, you are an authoritarian zealot.

> and your religion
> does EVERYthing to hide the truth about this holocaust.

How dare you raise the word "holocaust" -- which was a crime against
humanity -- in the context of AR. The Nazi view that Jews were subhuman
led to inhumanity. You're out of line because animals ARE subhuman.

>>Do you have any information from agencies not opposed to
>>ranching/farming to support this?
>
> Do you have any information NOT from ranchers or the meat-industry
> or those in government with ties to the meat industry to deny the
> hormones

What about the hormones?

>>Evidence from sources not polluted with the kind of partisanship of Peta
>>or other activist groups? If it's wrong to castrate bull calves, do you
>>promote spaying and neutering of dogs and cats?
>
> You should get down on your hands and needs and kiss PETA on the ass

No, but you can kiss mine.

> for their efforts to stop ALL unnecessary breeding of bulls and
> domestic pets. Naturally, your ignorance is astounding.

Naturally, lol? Strange choice of adverb given the context, jellyhead.
You're the twit who complains about one species being fixed, but
advocate it for others.

> Neutering dogs and cats who are homeless is appropriate to prevent
> millions MORE dogs and cats from either freezing to death, starving
> to death, or dying lonely in a gas chamber in a pound.

Cattle are homeless, too, idiot.

> In contrast, PETA is NOT going to go into a factory farm to castrate
> a bull to prevent future cows from being born.

No, they're only going to farms to gather propaganda for fund-raising.
It seems to work for them, but they'd be better off with real jobs.

> They are going to do
> what the government, weak-willed politicians, the FBI,
> and pro-meat fanatics like you are too cowardly to do: SHUT DOWN
> THE FACTORY FARM!

No, they're not.

>>Do you have any direct evidence of this? I'm from a ranching family, and
>>I've slaughtered more than my share of steers. It was neither inhumane
>>nor painful for any animal.
>
> Yeah, yeah. And I have been a vegetarian for 20 years and so is my
> family,

I've been vegetarian longer than you. So what?

> all for animal rights.

You should do what's best for yourself, not for posturing in the name of
novel and faddist political movements.

> And I know for a fact that the trolls I have
> persuaded to go vegetarian have suffered absolutely nothing either.

You've never persuaded anyone to go vegetarian. You forced it upon your
family, just as you seek to force the entire world to follow your
conscience.

> Don't lie and preach to me that shutting you and your ranching family
> down causes you "hardship" or crap like that. It is GOOD for you.

Unlike you, I don't make excuses. I don't have to. You'll never shut
down anyone.

> It makes you THINK and TRY OTHER THINGS in life.

Why don't you try this rather than forcing others to act on your weak
conscience?

> It is INFINITELY
> more HUMANE to all the cultists in the pro-meat religion to shut them
> all down and force them in prison for life than ANYthing they have
> EVER done to the animals they needlessly raised for food.

It worked for Stalin, didn't it.

>>Some dairy cattle are confined, MOST are not.
>
> Another lie.

It's the truth.

> Put the MOST in front of "confined" and you will be
> closer to the truth. Even so, you STILL admit that SOME are confined.

Yes, where land is too costly for operations, or further north when the
fields go dormant. Nobody denies that.

> That is QUITE a bit different from the meat religion's earlier mantra
> that NOT dairy cattle are confined.

No, nobody denies that dairy cattle are confined under certain
circumstances.

>>How do you know they cannot turn around? Have you ever gone inside the
>>"huge metal building"?
>
> Good. Then let us in.

Ask a farmer/rancher and see if he will.

>>Yes. Pesticides, herbicides, farm machinery, etc. It all takes a toll on
>>animals -- a heavy toll in death and dismemberment. Davey's seventh
>>point is correct.
>
> It would take LESS of a toll if YOU and your pro-ranching cult family
> (guess you learned from Charles Manson) spent your lives and careers
> looking for ways of growing food with MINIMAL suffering and pain,
> looking for biotechnological innovations in modifying plant food
> to yield more protein, etc.

Ho hum. I have family who are in plant science research. You don't know
anything about the toll on ranches and farms. You only know propaganda.

> Fact: You will not innovate unless you are FORCED to.

According to whom, scumbag?

<snip>
>>Groups you support are aligned with the sole purpose of making it harder
>>for some people to eat what they want.
>
> Waaah!! Waaah!! BOO- HOO!!

Need a hanky, tittybaby?

> And you stop telling PETA and
> pro-vegetarian
> groups what THEY can do with THEIR time and money!

No. Farmers and ranchers create products that consumers demand.
Activists create NOTHING except fear through disinformation.

> I think every
> nurse and doctor should refuse to assist a pro-meat cultist every time
> they get a heart attack or have an accident.

You sure are a sensitive and caring person, aren't you. You pretend to
be compassionate, but you just showed you're not. You also pretend
you're for democracy, but you want to deny others the right to vote with
their mouths. You're just another authoritarian intent on forcing others
to act on your burdensome conscience. Your post proves the claim that
vegans are intent on prosletyzing others to adopt a foreign lifestyle.

> If you are so "libertarian",
> then you would leave alone those who wish to have no association with
> your business.

You should practice what you preach. If you don't like meat, don't eat
it. Let others eat what they want. That's how I handle it.