On Mar 10, 3:48*pm, dh@. wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:32:44 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> ><dh@.> wrote in messagenews:422gn61ddj4dtujmoidj9fc4s4p5ndil0t@4ax .com....
> >> On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 14:30:18 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> >>><dh@.> wrote
> >>>>>*No* animals benefit by existing
>
> >>>> * *Many appear to Goo, so what do you want people to think prevents them
> >>>> from
> >>>> benefitting as they appear to, and how do you want people to think it
> >>>> prevents
> >>>> them?
>
> >>>Logic, here's one argument:
>
> >>>Two pigs exist, one has a good life provided by the farmer, Salatin, the
> >>>other has a life full of pain,
>
> >> * *From what?
>
> >Doesn't matter, anything, sleeping on cold concrete or slats.
>
> * * IMO they should be provided with something better, but

No, you don't believe that

I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
that all of the animals I eat had terrible
lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
because I don't care about them at all, but I
would just ignore their suffering.
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999

I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care
enough to make the effort.
Goo/****wit 31 July 2003 http://tinyurl.com/2v5ayqy

I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
also....
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999


> >>>suffering
>
> >> * *From what?
>
> >What does it matter, it's a theoretical example.

It doesn't matter. ****wit is just trying to waste your time, and
avoid facing the truth.

>
> >>>and deprivation
>
> >> * *From what?
>
> >Light, space, access to earth, whatever, it's unimportant what from, it's
> >theoretical.
>
> * * We'll just forget that one since

Since you're just bullshitting and stalling.


> >>>provided by Tyson.
>
> >>>One pig benefits, the other suffers and is harmed, yet both exist in equal
> >>>measure.
>
> >>>Therefore existence itself is clearly not the source of benefit.
>
> >> * *Life can and often does have positive value for animals,
>
> >Both of the animals in the theoretical example above had "life" in exactly
> >the same measure and manner, yet one suffered while the other thrived. That
> >PROVES that "life" is not the source of benefit.
>
>

[snip cracker bullshit and hand-waving]


>
> >> regardless of how
> >> you try to pretend it doesn't. Your little pretendings that nothing has
> >> ever
> >> benefitted from its existence

Nothing *has* ever benefited from existence. Proved.

> >It's not trickery,
>
> * * Trying to get people to incorrectly believe life is not a benefit when it
> is, is a trick that

It's not a trick.

Life is not a benefit. Trying to get people incorrectly to believe
that life is a benefit, when it has been shown conclusively that it
cannot be, is bullshit.


> >the LoL is verbal trickery and my logic demonstrates it.
>
> * * You have never been able to show how

He has.