"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
> "Dutch" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Scented Nectar" > wrote
>> > "Dutch" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >>
>> >> "Scented Nectar" > wrote
>> >> > "Dutch" > wrote
>> >> >> "Scented Nectar" > calls herself
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Killer of some bugs and a few
>> >> >> > worms.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You are refusing to recognize the deaths of the many invertebrates,
>> > birds
>> >> >> and mammals that your comfortable lifestyle is built upon. Your
>> >> >> weak
>> >> >> attempts to dismiss them by using words like "mostly wrong" are
>> > pathetic
>> >> > and
>> >> >> immoral in the extreme. You insist on creating this glorified image
> of
>> >> >> yourself, but refuse to acknowledge either the animals that die to
>> > serve
>> >> >> your daily wants and needs, or those people who do better than you
> but
>> >> >> who
>> >> >> don't follow your rules. You are a perfect example of the
>> >> >> closed-minded
>> >> >> bigotry that "veganism" creates.
>> >> >
>> >> > Immoral in the extreme? Nonsense.
>> >>
>> >> You're right, that was hyperbole, it's not extreme, it's minor-league,
>> >> garden variety, smarmy smugness.
>> >
>> > Then what's the big deal?
>>
>> It's a petty, creepy little deal. You like being a petty, creepy little
>> person, and I don't like people like that.
>
> Big deal. I don't like you either.

Touché

>> >> > Glorified image? Nonsense. No
>> >> > more than any other person of
>> >> > good self esteem.
>> >>
>> >> Most people don't base their self-esteem on cheesy diet-based moral
>> >> relativity.
>> >
>> > Mine is based on many things
>> > including my diet.
>>
>> Diet is a large part of yours, too large.
>
> You would consider any
> amount too large. Considering
> the topics of these newsgroups
> I talk often about being veg. and
> why I think it's a good thing. You
> on the other hand are just here
> to pick on vegans.

Vegans are people too, somewhere underneath all that pretense. That's who I
am trying to speak to.

>
>> >> > I fully realize
>> >> > that cds happen,
>> >>
>> >> No you don't, you refer to yourself glowingly as "a killer of bugs and
> a
>> > few
>> >> worms".
>> >
>> > Are you counting bugs and
>> > worms now?
>>
>> Why not? Vegans count bees and silkworms.
>
> Well you can count it if you
> like, but I won't. My homemade
> pesticide kills some bugs and
> repels others.

I don't count any of them, vegans do.

>> > Why did you
>> > think 'glowingly'?
>>
>> Because of the way you pose.
>
> What pose?

The smarmy self-righteous stubborn one.

>> >> > but I also see
>> >> > that animal products as a whole
>> >> > cause much more.
>> >>
>> >> That's probably true but not the point.
>> >
>> > It's very much the point.
>>
>> It's NOT the point. YOUR behaviour is what you are judged on, not some
>> nebulous group to which you claim to belong.
>
> There's nothing nebulous about
> the fact that vegetarians are
> connected to much fewer cds
> than meat eaters.

Yes there is. The group called "vegetarians" contains many people, mainly
urbanites, including you, who cause much more animal death and suffering
than some of the members of the group "non-vegetarians". The two groups are
overlapped in this respect. That's the truth that idealogues like the ones
you look up to can't abide.

> As for my
> behaviour, just what is it you
> are complaining about?

Your choice to place your own comfort and convenience ahead of the lives of
animals, then to crow about it like you;re a hero.


>> >> > If you want
>> >> > to discuss the fringe meat Rick
>> >> > eats, let's compare it to vegan
>> >> > food someone has grown with
>> >> > no cds.
>> >>
>> >> Your moral equation MUST acknowledge the dietary impact of "fringe
>> >> meat-eaters" compared to YOU, because you are basing YOUR self-image
>> >> based
>> >> on the relative dietary impacts of others. YOU set up the ground-rules
>> >> for
>> >> this game of cheesy moral relativity, now you must play by them.
>> >
>> > I only need to compare my own
>> > diet with what it was before
>> > becoming veg. I'm not going
>> > to compare it to fringe meats
>> > because I never used to eat
>> > them.
>>
>> That's the most absurd thing I've ever heard. If you used to be a
>> murderer
>> and a rapist can you feel pride in being only a rapist? People are judged
> on
>> what they do, period, not compared to what they used to do.
>
> Your examples are absurd.

They are analogies to show how morality doesn't work like you are trying to
do.

> Wild meats could never satisfy
> demand for meat in the world.

I never said they could, or should.

> Grass fed meats are often a
> scam since hay counts as a
> grass and has many connected
> cds.

Vegetables, fruit and grains are a scam on willing vegans since they have
many cds.

> The above meats would
> also never satisfy the demand
> for pork and poultry products.

I never said they should or would. They are what they are, a superior
alternative wrt animal suffering to some plant foods.

>
>> >> A person who bases their self-image on, say, skill in chess playing,
> may
>> >> take pride in the many opponents they can defeat, but to be real and
>> > honest
>> >> they also MUST be willing to admit that they are hacks compared to
>> > millions
>> >> of other players.
>> >
>> > You seem to want people to
>> > not have a good self image
>> > unless they do as you tell them
>> > to do. It seems to bug you
>> > that I like myself.
>>
>> You have no business feeling dietary superiority over people who consume
>> "fringe meats" as you call them, because they probably cause less animal
>> death than you.
>
> I first off feel dietary 'superiority'
> about my diet healthwise.

Vegetarians generally overplay the health benefits of their diets.

> Secondly, I don't think of fringe
> meats as being the good thing
> that you think they are.

It doesn't matter what you think, because your view is clouded by vegetarian
dogma.

> Nor do
> I think they have no cds.

I never said they has no cds.

>> >> You're not being real and honest. You want the smug feeling of
> comparing
>> >> yourself to the "opponents you can defeat", but you are not prepared
>> >> to
>> >> openly acknowledge those who are your betters.
>> >
>> > My 'betters'? What interesting
>> > wording you use. Who do you
>> > think are my betters and why?
>>
>> According the principle you proclaim that killing animals is [sic]
>> "mostly
>> wrong", YOU are MORE "mostly wrong" than the consumer of fringe meat,
>> thus
>> they are better than you, according to your criteria.
>
> I don't think a fringe meat eater
> is better than my vegetarian
> eating. So we don't agree on
> that.

It doesn't matter what you "think", if he kills fewer animals per calorie,
he *is* better on the scale that YOU established.

>
>> >> You think you'll lose something if you do, but you won't.
>> >
>> > Why would I make an
>> > acknowledgement that I
>> > don't believe? Are you
>> > suggesting that I lie?
>>
>> I'm suggesting that you stop evading, see and admit the truth. Trying
> weakly
>> to be a "vegan" is not a path to moral high ground, it's a recipe (you
> like
>> recipes) for moral confusion, like yours.
>
> It's a good recipe for health.

Not for everyone. It's an improvement over many western diets, but it's not
the answer for many people.