Dietary ethics
****wit David Harrison, convicted felon, lied:
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 20:35:51 -0700, Dutch > wrote:
>
>> ****wit David Harrison, convicted felon, lied:
>>
>>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:20:52 -0700, Dutch > wrote:
>>>
>>>> ****wit David Harrison, convicted felon, lied:
>>>>> On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:30:08 -0700, Dutch lied:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ****wit David Harrison, convicted felon, lied:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I showed that you only want to consider bad things because and only because
>>>>>>> considering positive aspects for millions of livestock animals works against the
>>>>>>> elimination objective, Goo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aside from battery hens, *you* only want to consider the good. You're
>>>>>> just as nonobjective as ARAs, in fact you're worse.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's no way that's true, so you're lying blatantly again. Not only are
>>>>> you lying blatantly, but you also have no idea which other lives I might believe
>>>>> are most often of negative value, if any.
>>>>
>>>> So list them.
>>>
>>> For one thing there are some who have lives of negative value in every group
>>> including groups where the vast majority of the animals appear to have lives of
>>> positive value, like broiler chickens and grass raised cattle. Most of them
>>> appear to have decent lives, but some don't for whatever particular reasons.
>>> Then in other groups the negative aspect is probably greater than the positive,
>>> like with caged egg producers and probably sows in gestation and farrowing
>>> crates. However I'm also aware that though farrowing crates probably cause life
>>> to be of negative or at least reduced value for the sows, they make life of much
>>> greater value for the young pigs. You people can't appreciate such details, but
>>> some of us are able to.
>>
>> <blah blah>
>
> Those are just more things you people hate
We hate liars. You are a liar.
|