View Single Post
  #17 (permalink)   Report Post  
Rat & Swan
 
Posts: n/a
Default Karen Winter, the Rush Limbaugh of t.p.a./a.a.e.v.



rick etter wrote:

<snip>
=============
>>>She claims not to cause unnecessary animal death and suffering. Of


No, I don't claim that. We ALL cause unnecessary animal death and
suffering, Rick. We all cause (using the same criteria you give)
unnecessary human death and suffering.

> course,


>>>she defines that as only meat animals.
>>>She does nothing to alleviate the massive numbers she contributes to for

> her
>>>selishness, conveninece, and entertainment.


I've mentioned steps I take in the past. You ignore them.

>>>throws a great big monkey wrench into her sanctimonious hypocrisy.


What sanctimonious hyprocricy?

>>AIUI Karen's moral code is not ruled by the utilitarian principle, you
>>appear to be invoking. It reads more like a set of rules.


You are correct my moral code is not primarily utilitarian,
although I use utilitarian calculations in some areas of
decision-making. It is not simply a set of rules, however.

> Thou shalt
>>not
>>eat meat from animals, which were killed by man seems to be part of
>>her
>>moral code.


Yes, just as "Thou shalt not eat meat from humans killed by man" is
a part of my moral code, and for similar reasons -- it is the
injustice of the killing, not the meat-eating per se which is the
issue. If I were stranded in a cabin with another person who died
of natural causes, I would have no ethical objections to
cannibalism in and of itself (there would be no injustice toward
the dead person). Of course, with humans, one has to consider
the remaining relatives, and I would have an aesthetic revulsion
toward eating a human -- but those are other issues.

Thou shalt not eat vegetables which have been sprayed with
>>pesticides doesn't.


Not in and of itslf. I prefer organic, non-agribusiness veggies
for other reasons of health and social justice for humans, but,
again, that is another issue from AR.

> =======================
> That's the simple rule for simple minds that vegans follow. That's the
> hypocrisy. Choosing to abhor only the death and suffering of animals that
> she doesn't have any effect on,


Er.. has it occurred to you, Rick, that I don't have a direct effect
because I choose to act in such a way as to avoid it? It doesn't
happen by accident. And, certainly, I abhor all unjust death and
all suffering.

and claiming that that choice 'makes a
> difference'.


I believe it does, for reasons I have given.

>>Personally
>>I don't see what difference it makes whether or not the action which
>>causes death and suffering is targetted at a specific victim or not,


Probably because you don't view animals and agriculture the way I
do.

> =======================
> That's what makes her, and other vegans on usenet, the hypocrites that they
> are. they target only one set of animals as being killed,
> while ignoring another whole set.


Which vegans here on usenet have claimed animals killed and caused
suffering in vegetable production are not significant? Who has
ignored them? We recognize they exist; we deplore them. But I
believe that their deaths are a result of and part of the same
mindset which is legitimized by the raising of livestock for food
and other products. I believe the system has to be attacked at
its source -- the philosophical view of the nature of animals'
rights.

>>as long as the consequences of the action are known in advance, so
>>enjoy
>>your steaks from grass reared cattle. I'm sure my diet includes worse
>>items.
>>Purely out of curiousity are you opposed to AW or just AR?


> =================
> just AR as it is preached on usenet. Besides, animals have no rights.


Which is the philosophical position AR opposes.

I've never seen Rick give any good reason why he believes animals
have no rights. Perhaps he will enlighten us now as to why he
believes this.

>>>>There are many posters to this newsgroup who share your penchant
>>>>for nasty personal ad-hominen attack and I greatly admire Karen's
>>>>consistent magnaninimous responses, patiently explaining her position
>>>>to people who are determined to misinterpret it and never letting
>>>>herself be dragged down to their level. I would like to see more
>>>>people, on both sides of the debate following her example.


>>>==================
>>>ROTFLMAO Which ones, holding on to lys and delusions? What a hoot!


Rat