View Single Post
  #25 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,alt.food.vegan,alt.food.vegan.science
Dutch Dutch is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,028
Default Always put quotes around "vegan"


<dh@.> wrote in message ...
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 13:48:14 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
>>
>>"Rupert" > wrote
>>> On Mar 17, 3:50 pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
>>>> On 3/17/2012 1:05 AM, Rupert wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Mar 15, 6:12 am, George > wrote:
>>>> >> It's just a hideously ugly fake word on its face, and the loathsome
>>>> >> ideas and false beliefs encapsulated in it are even more hideously
>>>> >> ugly.
>>>>
>>>> > What's ugly about the ideas involved in veganism?
>>>>
>>>> False morality is inherently ugly, especially when it involves self
>>>> exaltation and sanctimony.
>>>
>>> I don't believe that a desire to do something about animal suffering
>>> is inherently ugly, and I don't believe that it involves self-
>>> exaltation and sanctimony.

>>
>>This issue of collateral death and suffering does not exist in the
>>conscious
>>awareness of the vast majority of vegans. When it is introduced to them,
>>two
>>reactions outnumber all others by a wide margin, the first is denial, the
>>second is 'I'm still doing better than meat eaters'. Concern about the
>>death
>>and suffering they just became aware of virtually never comes into it, and
>>certainly not anywhere near to the level of the concern they claim to have
>>for farmed animals. This is compelling evidence that veganism is primarily
>>about maintaining a holy image, by the implication that the diet and
>>lifestyles of most people is tantamount to barbarism. This is the ugly
>>part,
>>there's almost a Muslim-like zeal to it.

>
> They SHOULD care especially since they try to PRETEND to care, but it's
> the
> same as you and your anticonsideration from my pov,


Its not the same, because your so-called "consideration" is self-serving
prattle, similar in many ways to the self-serving prattle that vegans spew.

which is even more evidence
> to me that you're still an eliminationist never having gotten over it or
> probably even coming close...well...maybe you almost kinda sorta tried to
> get
> over it a tiny bit, but that made you feel dirty...
> Anyway, **** all that. This is a time when you could possibly help your
> brother a bit, because afaik even at this stage in his life poor Rupert
> STILL
> can't comprehend how grass raised beef can sometimes/often involve fewer
> wildlife deaths than growing and harvesting soy beans does. Do you think
> you
> could explain it to him in a way that he could learn to comprehend at
> least one
> example? Or do you think that for some reason his brain is physically
> unable to
> accept much less appreciate those particular situations?


As I recall he has admitted that it is plausible.