"J.C. Scott" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> usual suspect wrote:
>> J.C. Scott wrote:
>> > Jay Santos wrote:
>> >
>> >>At Wikipedia:
>> >>
>> >> Those who avoid animal products for reasons of
>> >> health (eg, due to allergies, or to avoid
>> >> cholesterol), rather than compassion sometimes
>> >> describe themselves as "dietary vegans". However,
>> >> popular vegan author Joanne Stepaniak argues that
>> >> this term is inappropriate because veganism is by
>> >> definition about helping animals.
>> >>
>> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegan
>> >
>> >
>> > I don't eat any animal products at all, and it's strictly for
> health
>> > reasons. In my own case, it has nothing to do with compassion for
>> > animals. In fact, I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
>> > types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of
> such
>> > consumption, I abstain.
>>
>> What "ill effects"?
>
> http://www.drgreger.org/talks.html
=======================
All I saw was a scam artist looking for your money. What percentage do you
get for directing people to a site full of propaganda to scare the rubes
into "donating" all their cash?


>
>
>> > A person could label me vegetarian but that's
>> > too lax a term, in my opinion, because plenty of vegetarians
> continue
>> > to eat eggs and cheese, which I don't. My diet is extremely rigid.
>>
>> So is your sense of semantics. Why do you insist on using *any*
> labels
>> if animal rights isn't a personal concern?
>
> The dictionary definition of 'vegetarianism' or 'vegan' fails to
> mention animal rights, therefore your question is irrelevant.
===============
I suggest you get a better dictionary then fool. Look up the real meaning
of the term as it was intended by the *GUY* that coined it, idiot. You can
pretend now that it means anything you want, because you're a) too lazy to
reesly be vegan, and b) too stupid to know how to be vegan.
Hint, look up Donald Watson, killer.




>
>> > If
>> > the debate is strictly over whether the term "dietary vegan" is
> valid,
>> > well, it's just trivial semantics, as far as I'm concerned anyway.
>>
>> Then why do you consider "vegetarian" too lax a description of your
> diet?
>
> ... because I'm open to debate it just for the sake of discussion, but
> when it's all said and done it's really a nonevent, in my opinion.
========================
Except all the animals that die for your veggies. They might think that an
event happened.

>