> > Just by going vegan alone reduces by a huge amount the cds
> > that you always like to mention.
>
> Not that YOU know. You just want to believe it.
>
> Anyway, you STILL cause LOTS of animal deaths, and as
> you believe killing animals is absolutely wrong, you
> can't claim to be doing morally bettter at all. You
> STILL are in the same position as someone who has
> reduced his broom handle sodomization of children from
> daily to "only" twice a week. It still is wrong to be
> doing ANY of it, in your view.

Nonsense, I'm in the position of not killing
any animals myself, but not knowing
which farmers out there kill animals during
farming practices. Just like I'm in the position
of not abusing children myself, I can't magicly
know who out there is doing it though.

> > What do you suggest I do to stop bad farmers?
>
> Nothing. I suggest you only stop BUYING from any of
> them. Your responsibility ends with your purchases.
> If you're not buying from ANY death-dealing farmers,
> you're in the clear - on food, anyway.

I have no way of knowing which farmers are bad,
just as you don't know whether any of the retailers
you support engage in child abuse.

> >>>Short of starving
> >>>myself, eating vegan provides the least
> >>>accidental deaths.
> >>
> >>That's no good. Killing animals is ABSOLUTELY wrong in
> >>your view, just as broom-****ing children is
> >>ABSOLUTELY wrong. You DO view killing animals as
> >>absolutely wrong, and you have no valid rationale for
> >>stopping at some allegedly reduced amount.

There you go forcing the word absolutely at me
again. Killing animals is wrong. I don't say
absolutely. If an alligator attacked me and my
only choice was to die or snap its neck, then
obviously I would kill it. So stop trying to
enforce a state of absoluteness. on this
discussion.

> > Then, you should be doing more to protect kids
> > out there.
>
> No, we've been throught that. ALL we're talking about
> is whether or not I participate in the absolutely wrong
> activity. It isn't my responsibility personally to
> stop others; it is only my responsibility not to
> participate myself. I don't.

Just as I don't kill any animals myself (except that
pesky alligator!). It isn't my responsibility personally
to stop others; it is only my responsibility not to
participate myself. I don't. Sound familiar?

> > You can't buy anything from anyone
> > because they may or may not be child abusers.
>
> No, we're not talking about what someone does WITH the
> money you give him. We're talking about your
> acquisition of responsibility for the death lurking
> behind what he produces.

I don't acquire that responsibility. As such, my
reduction in cds is good enough for me. I'd be
living a fantasy if I thought I could eliminate all
farming deaths, so of course, doing the best
one can is quite good.

> No, you could get your LAZY ****ING ASS out to a farm
> and grow your own food, ensuring you don't kill any
> animals. If you can't find the money to do that by
> yourself, you can enlist all the other
> self-congratulatory, DO-NOTHING "vegans" and form a
> collective.

You sure do resort to a lot of swearing in place
of discussion. Moving to a farm is not currently
possible for me. Someday. Meanwhile you'll
just have to be content with me being content!

> > Tell me this easier way. Also, tell me how to
> > identify which products are from bad farmers.
>
> Not my responsibility. I have, already, suggested
> something: that you identify the high-CD foods in your
> diet, eliminate them, and substitute lower-CD foods in
> their place. Are you so ****ING GODDAMNED LAZY that
> you're unwilling to do even that little task? It's
> clear: you are not doing the best you can. You're
> just too ****ING LAZY to make any additional effort.

Gee, you weren't lazy. You wrote a whole paragraph
without answering my questions. I thought it was
supposed to be easy. Which are the high cd foods
and which are the low ones. Please provide proof
links. Also, tell me how to identify which products
are from bad farmers.

> > You know you really should read that thread
> > about moral absolutes. Ron makes a number
> > of good points.
>
> He doesn't. He's a ****-ant sophist who doesn't
> believe a word he says. He's just a squirrelly little
> homo who likes to play at being a philosopher, and he
> doesn't convince anyone.

Actually, he makes a lot of sense, and he doesn't
resort to meanness like you do.

> > Well, thanks for admitting that I didn't actually say
> > those things.
>
> They are all implied by what you did say. They are there.

The voices in your head are not in mine. Due to
your constant mixing up of what I mean, I suggest
that you take me more literally, and not believe
things you think are implied.

> > When did I put it there?
>
> The whole time you've been posting here.

Again, thanks for admitting that I never actually
said it at all. You think it's 'implied' from my
various posts.


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button.