On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:36:30 -0700, Goo wrote:

>On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:47:38 -0400, dh@. wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 22:12:54 -0700, Goo 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.
>
>Below are all true.

Then you're saying that some people SHOULD become vegans, Goo.

>>"People who don't want them to exist should be "vegans"." - Goo
>>
>>""vegans" are interested in their influence on animals,
>>****wit. They want everyone to be "vegan", which would
>>mean no animals raised for food and other products. That's
>>an influence, whether you like it or not." - Goo
>>
>>logically one MUST conclude that not raising them in the first place is the
>>ethically superior choice." - Goo
>>
>>""Veg*nism" certainly doesn't harm any living farm animals.
>>And if everyone adopted "veg*nism", no farm animals would
>>live in bad conditions." - Goo
>>
>>you MUST believe that it makes moral sense not
>>to raise the animals as the only way to prevent the harm that
>>results from killing them." - Goo
>>
>>"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude
>>than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo
>>
>>""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of
>>their deaths" - Goo
>>
>>"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing
>>of the animals erases all of it." - Goo
>>
>>"Humans could change it. They could change it by ending it." - Goo
>>
>>"There is no "selfishness" involved in wanting farm animals not to
>>exist as a step towards creating a more just world." - Goo