On Apr 8, 5:21*pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
> On 4/8/2012 1:48 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 7, 6:02 pm, George > *wrote:
> >> On 4/7/2012 1:32 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>> On Apr 7, 12:18 am, George > * *wrote:
> >>>> On 4/6/2012 12:19 PM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>>>> [steaming load snipped]
>
> >>>> Why do all "vegans" spend a huge amount of time searching for micrograms
> >>>> of animal bits to get out of their diet, and no time whatever trying to
> >>>> determine what the lowest-harm fruits and vegetables are?
>
> >>> Not all vegans do that.
>
> >> *ALL* "vegans" do it. *Stop bullshitting.
>
> >> *NO* "vegan" tries to find the least-harm fruit and vegetable produce;
> >> *all* engage in a continual, silly, absurd effort to get micrograms of
> >> animal parts out of their diets and "lifestyles".
>
> > How did you come by evidence for this
>
> "vegans" present it to me.
>

You think you can come to some kind of valid conclusion about "all
vegans" on the basis of the vegans you have met on usenet?

> >>>> Why would any rational person take such absurd satisfaction in learning
> >>>> about the minute part of an anchovy that's in a bottle of Worcestershire
> >>>> sauce and thus stop buying one bottle a year, versus finding some grain
> >>>> to substitute for a known lethal product like rice?
>
> >>> No rational person who was aware of the harm associated with rice
> >>> would do that, obviously.
>
> >> Most "vegans" eat rice. *http://tinyurl.com/cx9fedr
>
> You're ****ed.

I don't really see why that would be.