On 4/7/2010 11:53 AM, dh@. wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 00:23:33 -0700, > wrote:
>
>>
>> <dh@.> wrote in message ...
>>> On Sun, 4 Apr 2010 13:41:01 -0700, > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> <dh@.> wrote in message ...
>>>>> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 13:02:34 -0700, > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <dh@.> wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 19:11:37 -0700, > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <dh@.> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:34:06 -0700, > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <dh@.> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> My guess is that he pretty much only hangs out with people
>>>>>>>>>>> who are even less "tolerant" than he is, making him feel somewhat
>>>>>>>>>>> more free. Remember at one time he pretended to be in some way a
>>>>>>>>>>> "new welfarist" until Goo and his other boy kicked Rupert's ass
>>>>>>>>>>> for pretending to consider the lives of some animal(s)
>>>>>>>>>>> somewhere....possibly even som *livestock* animal(s). But he
>>>>>>>>>>> can't do it and you can't do it and Goo can't do it and Salt
>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't do it....you people just can't do it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nobody should do "it", and the reason nobody but you does is because
>>>>>>>>>> "it"
>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> self-serving bullshit.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's a necessary part of evaluating whether or not it's cruel
>>>>>>>>> TO THE ANIMALS for humans to raise them for food.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That doesn't mean anything.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not to those of you too purely selfish to take the animals
>>>>>>> into consideration, but it's very significant to anyone who does
>>>>>>> consider them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Meaningless, self-serving tripe.. patting yourself on the back for being
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> person who "considers" animals when all you do is eat them.
>>>>>
>>>>> I consider the billions more that I don't eat as much as the
>>>>> ones that I do, while misnomer addicts can't afford to consider
>>>>> any.
>>>>
>>>> Explain the purpose of this "considering" of any of them.
>>>
>>> Considering significant aspects of the situation like that
>>> gives me a more realistic interpretation than misnomer addicts
>>> are able to form by only considering things that support the
>>> elimination objective.
>>
>> Explain the significance, I don't see it.
>
> The significance is

EXPLAIN the significance. Don't tell us who it's for. IDENTIFY and
EXPLAIN it.

You can't, of course.


>>>> You can't,
>>>
>>> That's a blatant lie.
>>>
>>>> because
>>>> it's its only purpose is to serve your circular little self-serving
>>>> argument
>>>> and you are loath to admit it.
>>>>
>>>>>> What a complete joke you are.
>>>>>
>>>>> What a completely selfish person you are.
>>>>
>>>> Selfish towards whom or what?
>>>
>>> Every single creature other than yourself:
>>
>> In what sense?
>
> In every sense

In what sense? Be specific.

You can't, of course. You're just being deliberately evasive and
obtuse. Look up "obtuse", and get back to us - we all know you don't
know what it means.