On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 12:06:43 -0700, Goo wrote:

>On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:55:00 -0400, dh@. wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 18:51:59 -0700, Goo wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:43:45 -0400, dh@. wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:53:54 -0700, Goo wussiley puled:
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:05:20 -0400, dh@. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 13:39:24 -0700, Goo wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:05:06 -0400, dh@. wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 15:39:22 -0700, Goo wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 13:14:14 -0400, dh@. pointed out:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Goo doesn't believe any animals benefit from living and it's all the same to
>>>>>>>>>>him regardless of the quality of their lives:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"it is not "better" that the animal exist, no matter
>>>>>>>>>>its quality of live" - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"It is not "better" in any moral way, and not in *any* way
>>>>>>>>>>at all to the animal itself, that the animal exists." - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"It is not "good" for the animals that they exist, no matter
>>>>>>>>>>how pleasant the condition of their existence." - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"It is not "good for them" to exist, no matter how pleasant
>>>>>>>>>>the existence." - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"Life "justifying" death is the stupidest goddamned thing you
>>>>>>>>>>ever wrote." - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"NO livestock benefit from being farmed." - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"No farm animals benefit from farming." - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"There is nothing to "appreciate" about the livestock "getting
>>>>>>>>>>to experience life" - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"Shut the **** up about "consideration" for "their lives"" - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>""Getting to experience life" has no significance." - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"the "getting to experience life" deserves NO moral
>>>>>>>>>>consideration, and is given none; the deliberate killing
>>>>>>>>>>of animals for use by humans DOES deserve moral
>>>>>>>>>>consideration, and gets it." - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of
>>>>>>>>>>their deaths" - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"Causing animals to be born and "get to experience life"
>>>>>>>>>>(in ****wit's wretched prose) is no mitigation at all for
>>>>>>>>>>killing them." - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"You consider that it "got to experience life" to be some kind
>>>>>>>>>>of mitigation of the evil of killing it." - Goo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"The meaningless fact-lette that farm animals "get to
>>>>>>>>>>experience life" deserves no consideration when asking
>>>>>>>>>>whether or not it is moral to kill them. Zero." - Goo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The statement below is mangled from the original, and so is not a quote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want people to think you disagree with yourself about the quote below
>>>>>>Goo then YOU need to try to explain how you think you do. Otherwise Goober we'll
>>>>>>be left with nothing else to believe other than that you do agree with yourself
>>>>>>about all of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"the nutritionally unnecessary choice deliberately to kill an animal
>>>>>>>>>>ALWAYS causes a moral harm greater in magnitude than . . . the
>>>>>>>>>>moral "benefit" realized by the animal in existing at all" - Goo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The statement below is mangled from the original, and so is not a quote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want people to think you disagree with yourself about the quote below
>>>>>>Goo then YOU need to try to explain how you think you do. Otherwise Goober we'll
>>>>>>be left with nothing else to believe other than that you do agree with yourself
>>>>>>about all of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude
>>>>>>>>>>than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The statement below is mangled from the original, and so is not a quote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want people to think you disagree with yourself about the quote below
>>>>>>Goo then YOU need to try to explain how you think you do. Otherwise Goober we'll
>>>>>>be left with nothing else to believe other than that you do agree with yourself
>>>>>>about all of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing
>>>>>>>>>>of the animals erases all of it." - Goo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The statement below is mangled from the original, and so is not a quote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want people to think you disagree with yourself about the quote below
>>>>>>Goo then YOU need to try to explain how you think you do. Otherwise Goober we'll
>>>>>>be left with nothing else to believe other than that you do agree with yourself
>>>>>>about all of it.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's a forgery - not a quote.
>>>>
>>>> If you want people to think you disagree with yourself about your own quotes
>>>>Goo then YOU need to try to explain how you think you do. Otherwise Goober we'll
>>>>be left with nothing else to believe other than that you do agree with yourself
>>>>about all of it.
>>>
>>>It's a forgery, ****wit. Proved.
>>
>> It's YOUR quote Goo, but if you want to pretend it's a forgery then try
>>presenting some reason to think so. Also Goob, if you want people to think you
>>think you disagree with yourself about any of your above quotes, then YOU need
>>to try explaining how you want them to think you do. Try now Goo. GO!:
>
>Not anyone's quote

That's a blatant lie Goo since it's YOUR quote. Not only did you lie
blatantly and obviously Goo, but you also PROVED my prediction correct.

>>(correct prediction: the Goober can't explain how he wants people to think he
>>thinks he disagrees with himself about any of his quotes that I share, because
>>he agrees with himself about every one of them)