View Single Post
  #108 (permalink)   Report Post  
Ron
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Ron" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "Ron" > wrote
> >> >> [..]
> >> >>
> >> >> >> > The vegan mitigates their responsibility by following all the
> >> >> >> > rules
> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> > the laws associated with killing animals.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> There are no rules and laws associated with killing animals, no
> >> >> >> such
> >> >> >> law
> >> >> >> is
> >> >> >> even feasible. Vegans have fabricated a morality outside the normal
> >> >> >> one,
> >> >> >> with moral rules involving animals that go far beyond it, yet they
> >> >> >> live
> >> >> >> in
> >> >> >> the comfort and protection of the normal moral system with it's
> >> >> >> cheap
> >> >> >> affordable food and health care. If they are going to preach an
> >> >> >> outlandish
> >> >> >> moral system and preach to me that I ought to follow it, they need
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> follow
> >> >> >> it first. Cutting down on animal products is not nearly enough to
> >> >> >> validate
> >> >> >> their alleged moral system.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Normal moral system?" What's that about. I was taught to eat meat
> >> >> > and
> >> >> > I
> >> >> > was taught which meats were acceptable and socially acceptable eat.
> >> >>
> >> >> Customs.
> >> >
> >> > Thank you. Customs are taught and learned. They are not biological or
> >> > genetic. They are common and popular.
> >>
> >> Therefore bad according to you.
> >>
> >> >> > Of course, your argument has been disputed and your simply ignored
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > formations that clearly demonstrated the double standard that you
> >> >> > applied to the vegan.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not at all, you have utterly misconstrued the arguments all along the
> >> >> way.
> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Come on, Dutch. You lost.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Phaw.. in your dreams. Wake up!
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I clearly demonstrated this. When your own logic was presented with
> >> >> > a
> >> >> > different example, you simply commented that you didn't have the
> >> >> > time
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > do all that was necessary to follow through.
> >> >>
> >> >> Your examples were nothing but a convoluted mess based on fallacies. I
> >> >> do
> >> >> not have the time to completely untangle your mixed-up thinking, you
> >> >> must
> >> >> do
> >> >> some of the work yourself.
> >> >
> >> > the work was done. All the was required was that you clarify why you
> >> > applied one standard to the vegan and another to yourself.
> >> >
> >> >> If you would learn to listen, instead of playing devil's advocate on
> >> >> every
> >> >> point to attempt to "score", you might get somewhere. Playing devil's
> >> >> advocate is exactly as valid as agreeing with everything you read.
> >> >
> >> > Listen? I'm reading your comments.
> >>
> >> You're reading but graspinf anything. I typically make a series of
> >> replies
> >> in a post, most of which you breeze over because you are being corrected,
> >> than you insert some non-sequitor knee-jerk remark at the end.
> >>
> >> Your approach is WORTHLESS.
> >>
> >> > Where you consider me being Devil's Advocate, I consider you blindly
> >> > introjecting what is spoonfed.
> >>
> >> False, unlike you I do NOT blindly reject that which is "spoonfed" in
> >> favour
> >> of irrational claptrap.

> >
> > Dutch, others can read this as well as the fact the archives of this
> > discussion will be around for a bit of time.

>
> Mores the pity for you, flyweight.
>
> > I have clearly given you opportunities to clarify information which you
> > have posted and asked me to accept simply because it is common.

>
> Your "opportunities to clarify" are nonsensical, they're poses. You're not
> bright and you're proving it.


Astonish me then. Which point from the website that you asked me to read
should we review, publicly. Do you need to check with the clique before
you can respond?

You seemed to view it as credible and reputable, when you asked me more
than once to read it.