usual suspect wrote:

> denege-Rat wrote:
>
>>>>> Worse: she knows about the "problem", and she point-blank refuses
>>>>> to take *any* concrete measure to stop causing it.
>>
>>
>> Rat:
>>
>>>> Which, of course, is not true, and which you know is not true
>>
>>
>>> It is true.
>>
>>
>> No, it's not.
>
>
> Yes, it is. Jon is correct in noting that your actions do not match your
> rhetoric when it comes to collateral deaths. Not only that, but you
> engage in sophistry to evade the issue. Your diet and lifestyle are not
> free of animal casualties.

And she is doing nothing to change that.

>
>> You and jonnie both try to create a false belief -- that
>> unless all negative effects of one's life are eliminated, one has
>> done nothing.
>
>
> You point out the "problem" and offer "solutions" which merely avoid the
> problem. The "problem" exists regardless of your diet. You choose to
> deny the antecedent. It is your raison d'etre.
>
>> That is false,
>
>
> No, it's true.
>
>> I understand it is false, and I refuse to be sucked into jonnie's
>> vicious and hate-motivated delusions any longer.
>
>
> It's not vicious, hateful, or delusional to point out instances of
> denying the antecedent, immoral or amoral behavior, or hypocrisy.
> Veganism at best is hypocritical since it's a false solution to a phony,
> contrived problem. At worst, it's a form of intolerant and ignorant
> zealotry. Which category is yours?
>
>>> You continue purchasing foods produced with chemicals and
>>> machines, that are then transported and stored. Deaths occur in your
>>> food chain,
>>
>>
>> Yes, they do, and I know it.
>
>
> At least you admit your "lifestyle" is responsible for animal
> casualties. Your "lifestyle" is no different from any other, except you
> don't eat animal parts and you think it makes you more ethical than
> those who do. This, of course, gets back to the main issue, namely that
> animals still die for your food -- which is why you are no more moral or
> ethical than anyone who eats meat.
>
>> It's part of being a human being;
>
>
> No, it isn't. It's part of nature. Veganism is anti-nature. Veganism is
> an attempt to foist the impractical and unnatural on all creatures, not
> just mankind.
>
>> the
>> same is true of you, jonnie, and every other human on the planet.
>
>
> Yes, but it only bothers YOU and people like you.
>
>>> you just abstain from animal parts.
>>
>>
>> Not "just" -- it is one aspect of an ethical philosophy.
>
>
> There's nothing ethical about it.

And it indeed is all she does. All the rest is merely
hot air.

>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> Sorry, you two -- I'm home and I'm content;
>>
>>
>>> Face in muff?
>>
>>
>> Now and again, yes.
>
>
> Do you use strap ons and other phallic toys?
>
>> I love my wife,
>
>
> You don't have a wife. You're a woman. Your own state does not respect
> such a legal relationship between you and a person of the same sex.
>
>> and I show her that in various
>> ways, which is as it should be.
>
>
> That isn't love.
>
>> (At home, content with my life, and secure in God's love for me, and
>> mine for Him.)
>
>
> He doesn't approve of or respect your homosexual relationship, either.
>