View Single Post
  #66 (permalink)   Report Post  
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:
<...>
> Even though some of these animal deaths might truly be avoidable, it is
> not the same as eating the flesh of an animal killed only to satisfy
> some urgent need to eat meat.


If you think killing one animal for food is wrong, why do you so
non-chalantly turn an eye to the THOUSANDS of dead animals for your
"vegan" food SO LONG AS THOSE ANIMALS AREN'T TO SATISFY WHAT YOU CALL
"THE SAME URGENT NEED" TO EAT?

Face it, clown, your diet causes animals to die. Rick's causes animals
to die. In reality, how the **** are you more ethical than he?

> You are trying to paint the act of eating brown rice, other grains and
> soy products as morbid and cavalier exercises in dietary excess.


They are morbid exercises. Quick example. You vegan activist morons trot
out feed:meat ratios all the time. Yet you're reflexively dismissive
when reminded that soy products, like tofu, require the same or greater
input per product yield. Yet you never say "don't eat tofu" or other
fake meats despite their wasteful yields -- more wasteful than certain
meats.

> You couldn't be more wrong.


He couldn't be more right. You're the one who's wrong.

> Simply stated - i'll pass.


Pussy.

> You don't seem to have the intellectual
> faculties to follow a simple argument, or parse a simple sentence.


He does, and he's already cut through your bullshit. You, otoh, don't
seem to have the ability to make a cogent argument that stands up to
reality -- so just keep bleating about "some urgent need to eat meat"
while your own diet kills more and more animals. Wasteful pig.

<...>