Scented Nectar wrote:
>>>>>>>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?
>
> Do you see a scale to wrongness?

No.

>>>>Yes.
>>>
>>>Do you personally find the
>>>cds to be immoral?
>>
>>I don't think "killing animals is wrong." You do. Your consumption
>>doesn't do anything to diminish animal deaths.
>
> You already know that that in
> fact it does.

No, I disagree with your assumption that the absence of meat on a plate
means you've done anything to reduce animal deaths.

>>>>>Glorified image?
>>>>
>>>>Yes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>No more than any other person of
>>>>>good self esteem.
>>>>
>>>>The difference is most people acquire their esteem from successful
>>>>endeavors. You build yours through what you eat/won't eat, and through
>>>>your chronic buck-passing.
>>>
>>>There is nothing wrong with
>>>feeling good about what I eat.
>>
>>To call yourself "successful" as you have on the basis of what you eat
>>IS wrong.
>
> What I eat is only part of
> who I am,

Why do you define yourself in any degree by what you eat?

> but there is
> nothing wrong with feeling
> good about what I eat.

It's a phony sense of achievement for a completely phony person. It
suits you.

>>>You do it yourself, don't you?
>>
>>No.
>>
>>
>>>You seem to consider yourself
>>>a flexitarian, if I'm not mistaken.
>>
>>I don't call myself anything with regard to what I eat anymore, nor do I
>>engage in sanctimony about what I eat.
>
> That in itself is a belief system
> regarding foods.

No, it isn't.

> What about
> your desire to eat healthy foods?

I don't define myself by that.

> Would you still add that as a
> label to what you eat?

No.

>>>>>I fully realize
>>>>>that cds happen,
>>>>
>>>>You do nothing to minimize them in your own consumption.
>>>
>>>My change from a meat
>>>eater to veg was enough
>>>of a change to drastically
>>>reduce them.
>>
>>Not drastically at all. At best, insignificantly; at worst, you're
>>actually causing more CDs than before because of all the imported and
>>transported foods, reliance on "lethal" crops like grains and legumes,
>>machine-harvesting, pesticides, etc.
>
> You know full well that the
> meat industry uses tons and
> tons more grains and legumes
> than people do, and therefore
> have more cds.

And YOU know full well that you object only to the 1001st death -- you
don't care than 1000 animals die, your sole protest is against the one
killed for its meat.

>>>I don't expect extremes from
>>>myself, so I'm happy
>>>enough from that.
>>
>>More weak spin. You don't expect yourself to do anything differently
>>even after stating "killing animals is wrong."
>
> Mostly. Get it right, will you.

I do indeed believe that killing animals is wrong...
http://tinyurl.com/88pb4

Want more examples where you never qualified it with "mostly" (which is
irrelevant).

>>>>>but I also see
>>>>>that animal products as a whole
>>>>>cause much more.
>>>>
>>>>Tu quoque fallacy.
>>>
>>>It's no fallacy.
>>
>>Look it up, dumb ass. Your argument rests on a tu quoque fallacy.
>>http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thomps...s/tuquoque.asp
>
> I'm not saying meat is bad too.
> I'm saying it's worse.

Same fallacy, you dumb ass.

>>>>>If you want
>>>>>to discuss the fringe meat Rick
>>>>>eats, let's compare it to vegan
>>>>>food someone has grown with
>>>>>no cds.
>>>>
>>>>You would still be objecting only to +1 (1001st) death.
>>>
>>>No.
>>
>>Yes.
>>
>>
>>>It would be 1 death to 0 deaths.
>>
>>Wrong. Garden and you *will* kill something.
>
> We'll see about that.

You sure will, ****.