rick wrote:
> "Rupert" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> >
> > rick wrote:
> >> "Rupert" > wrote in message
> >> ups.com...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > rick wrote:
> >> >> "Rupert" > wrote in message
> >> >> oups.com...
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > rick wrote:
> >> >> >> Dutch, ruperts message didn't show up on my server, so
> >> >> >> I'll
> >> >> >> piggy-back on yours...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Dutch" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > "Rupert" > wrote
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Dutch wrote:
> >> >> >> >>> > wrote
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> [..]
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> > I think you'll find "factory-farming" usually
> >> >> >> >>> > refers
> >> >> >> >>> > to
> >> >> >> >>> > the
> >> >> >> >>> > intensive
> >> >> >> >>> > rearing of animals. Have you got a justification
> >> >> >> >>> > for
> >> >> >> >>> > calling
> >> >> >> >>> > mono-culture crop production "factory-farming"?
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> Don't like people turning your pet pjoratives back
> >> >> >> >>> on
> >> >> >> >>> you
> >> >> >> >>> eh?
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Well, "factory-farming" is a simple descriptive term.
> >> >> >> ========================
> >> >> >> Yes, it is, and as I explained, far more descriptive of
> >> >> >> crop
> >> >> >> farming....
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Well, I wasn't very convinced by what you said.
> >> >> ====================
> >> >> Only because you're brainwashing has your mind closed. Try
> >> >> to
> >> >> reute what you have been told, don't just say nah, nah,
> >> >> nah,
> >> >> killer.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Well, the only fact you provided was that beef cattle start
> >> > out
> >> > on
> >> > pasture. I asked for a reference on this.
> >> ===========
> >> Really? I didn't see any such request. Try USDA fool...
> >> "...All cattle start out eating grass; three-fourths of them
> >> are
> >> "finished" (grown to maturity) in feedlots..."
> >> http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Fact_Sheets...able/index.asp
> >>================
> Dodge noted, rupert....
>
>

What dodge? Thank you for the reference.

>
>
> >>
> >> But, however that may be, it
> >> > hardly proves your case. To prove your case, you would need
> >> > to
> >> > examine
> >> > the details of crop production and intensive rearing of
> >> > animals
> >> > and
> >> > compare them, and demonstrate that the former deserved the
> >> > label
> >> > "factory farming" more than the latter. You didn't do this.
> >> ========================
> >> You already claimed to have done that research. You provide
> >> your
> >> data, killer.
> >> see below...
> >>
> >
> > No, I didn't. I claimed to have read some information about
> > intensive
> > rearing of animals. "Factory-farming" sounds like a pretty
> > reasonable
> > description to me. I don't need to point you to all the
> > descriptions of
> > it in the literature.
> =====================
> Not literature you fool, propaganda.
>

No, philosophical literature.

>
> You claimed crop production was more deserving of
> > the title "factory-farming". Fine. The onus is on you to prove
> > it.
> > =======================
> Yet you've been shown over and over how crop production is far
> more "factory" than meat production.

No, I haven't.

> The onus is on you to prove
> your ignorant claims. You've made many wide claims, and as yet
> have never backed ANY o them up. Why is that killer? Too
> stupid, or you just don't have anything?
>

I have backed up the claims I've made.

>
>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > It carries much more baggage than that.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> It doesn't matter
> >> >> >> >> very much what it actually refers to, I was just
> >> >> >> >> surprised
> >> >> >> >> that he
> >> >> >> >> thought this was a correct application of the word.
> >> >> >> ==================
> >> >> >> It's very correct, unless of course you have an agenda
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> promote
> >> >> >> that doesn't have anything to do with reality, eh
> >> >> >> killer?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Well, feel free to support your case.
> >> >> ================
> >> >> LOL I already did, fool. You have yet to support your
> >> >> contentions. vegans never do, and never will, because all
> >> >> you
> >> >> have is a simple rule for your simple minds....
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > You made an attempt to support your case, but I wasn't that
> >> > impressed
> >> > with it so far. I have provided arguments for my
> >> > contentions.
> >> > If you
> >> > want to address them, go ahead.
> >> ====================
> >> No, you haven't. You've spewed vegan propaganda without any
> >> data. Show your proof, fool. Aterall, you claimed to have
> >> done
> >> all the research.
> >>
> >
> > I have pointed out that intensively reared animals suffer
> > considerably.
> ================
> And you have continued to refuse to provide any PROOF of this
> statement, fool. Again, why is that? Too stupid, or you just
> don't have anything?
>

I've provided some references in my reply to Rudy.

>
> > I have pointed out that most animal food production requires
> > more plant
> > production than plant food production.
> ======================
> And again, you've been told that there is NO requirment to feed
> crops to animals.
>

Not in every case, no.

>
> And I have linked to an article
> > which discusses Davis' ruminant-pasture model of food
> > production, and
> > compares it to a vegan model.
> =====================
> An ignorant propaganda piece that means nothing. Provide real
> data, rom real sources, killer.
>

If you have specific criticisms to make of the article, make them.

>
> >
> > If you feel there's a contention I've made which isn't
> > adequately
> > supported by all of this, tell me what it is.
> =================
> Every thing you have said so far, fool. You have NEVER backed up
> ANY of your ignorant spew...
>

False.

>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I realize that, because you don't fancy yourself as
> >> >> >> > supporting
> >> >> >> > "factory farming".
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Vegans typically have idealized views of themselves.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> Anyway, I intended (correctly or otherwise) to use
> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> word
> >> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> >> refer to
> >> >> >> >> intensive rearing of animals. Furthermore this
> >> >> >> >> clearly
> >> >> >> >> involves a lot
> >> >> >> >> more suffering than what he was referring to.
> >> >> >> ===========================
> >> >> >> LOL More suffering that slicing, dicing, shredding and
> >> >> >> having
> >> >> >> your guts rotted out?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Yes.
> >> >> ================
> >> >> Show it then, fool.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > I believe that being confined for most of your life in cages
> >> > or
> >> > stalls
> >> > that are too narrow for you to turn around, and being
> >> > subject
> >> > to
> >> > unanaesthetized branding, dehorning, debeaking, castration,
> >> > and
> >> > tail
> >> > docking,
> >> =====================
> >> You haven't proven that all animals "suffer" in these ways,
> >> killer. It has been proven though that your crops kill
> >> massive
> >> numbers of animals in very brutal, very inhumane ways.
> >>
> >
> > It's also been proven that factory-farmed animals live lives
> > with a
> > great deal of misery and suffering in them,
> ====================
> Really? Wheb did you post that proof, fool? Never!
>

It's been proven. Not necessarily by me. But see the references I gave
in my reply to Rudy.

>
> more suffering than would
> > be involved in being killed by a combine harvester, or even a
> > more
> > protacted death from chemicals.
> ======================
> ROTFLMAO What a maroon....
> Tell me fool, how protacted a death is a bolt to the brain
> compared to haveing your guts turn to mush over several days?
> You truly are the ignorant fool you are posting as, aen't you?
>
>
>
> >
> >> cause more suffering than being killed in a relatively short
> >> > time by a combine harvester.
> >> ==============================
> >> LOL Forget all those chemical applications already, killer?
> >> Tell us how having your guts turn to mush over several days is
> >> a
> >> "humane" way to die...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> You must be totally brainwashed, eh fool?
> >> >> >> Do some meat animals 'suffer?' I'm sure that some
> >> >> >> probably
> >> >> >> do,
> >> >> >> according to your definition. But they are not "ALL"
> >> >> >> meat
> >> >> >> animals, fool.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Just the great majority of them.
> >> >> ==================
> >> >> Then why the complete ban on all meats, killer? Your
> >> >> veggies
> >> >> kill far more animals than the meats I eat.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > What complete ban on all meats?
> >> =================
> >> Then you do eat some meats, eh?
> >
> > No.
> ==================
> Then as I said, there is a complete ban on ALL meats....
>

That's a funny way of saying "I don't eat any meat". But I don't eat
any meat, no.

>
> >
> >> Again, you have failed to answer
> >> the question. Why the complete ban/avoidance/whatever you
> >> want
> >> to call it, of ALL meats?
> >>
> >
> > You're asking me why I don't eat meat? I don't particularly
> > want to,
> > and I don't see any reason why I should.
> ======================
> Nobody has said that you hae to fool. All we;re doing is
> pointing out the idiocy of your so-called minimization based
> solely on a simple rule for your simple mind.
>

Why is it idiotic? I'm trying to minimize my contribution to the
suffering of animals. If you have any suggestions for how I can do it
better, I'm happy to hear them.

>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Do you have some evidence that the production of the meat
> >> > you
> >> > eat
> >> > causes fewer deaths than the production of vegetables?
> >> > ==========================
> >> SUre, come on down and see them. You can even pet them if you
> >> like. They are pasture raised, no hormones, no antibiotics,
> >> no
> >> feed crops. They are not confined, though they do have a
> >> 3-sided barn for shelter when they want. The chickens next
> >> door
> >> run freely through our back yard, and again, then do have a
> >> coop,
> >> but are left to roam on their own.
> >> The beef I eat from these animals replaces 100s of 1000s o
> >> calories that YOU get from mono-culture factory farming. I
> >> count
> >> the number of animals daths for my meat by 100s of meals per
> >> death. You're lucky if you an say 100s of deaths per meal.
> >>
> >
> > I would be interested to know where you got that last figure
> > from.
> ================
> Read the data fool. read about voles per acre.
>

What data?

>
> >
> > Pasture forage production does involve the deaths of some
> > animals. You
> > would have to take those into account as well. There is some
> > discussion
> > of the issue in the article I linked to.
> =================
> And those would be what? Care to tell us?
>

Sorry, what do you mean by "those"?

>
> >
> > But sure, maybe you are in a position where you can ethically
> > eat some
> > meat. Fine. More power to you.
> ======================
> There is no 'ethics' involved in eating meat fool! If there wee,
> based on animal death and suffering in total numbers, then you
> fail miserably!
>

Can you demonstrate this?

>
> >
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Does it? How do you know? How much animal death and
> >> >> >> > suffering
> >> >> >> > results from cultivation, planting, spraying,
> >> >> >> > harvesting,
> >> >> >> > storage protection, etc, etc..
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>> > Anyway, it's all very well to abuse me for
> >> >> >> >>> > supporting
> >> >> >> >>> > these
> >> >> >> >>> > practices,
> >> >> >> >>> > but you don't offer any serious alternative to
> >> >> >> >>> > doing
> >> >> >> >>> > so.
> >> >> >> >>> > If
> >> >> >> >>> > you had a
> >> >> >> >>> > serious proposal for my further reducing the
> >> >> >> >>> > contribution I
> >> >> >> >>> > make to
> >> >> >> >>> > animal suffering then I would consider it.
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> Stop supporting commercial agriculture, it kills
> >> >> >> >>> countless
> >> >> >> >>> billions
> >> >> >> >>> of animals. Anyway, it's you who proposed that
> >> >> >> >>> killing
> >> >> >> >>> animals is
> >> >> >> >>> to be avoided, why should we now determine for you
> >> >> >> >>> how
> >> >> >> >>> you
> >> >> >> >>> are going to live up to it? Do your own homework.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I'm sorry, can you quote me as saying that buying
> >> >> >> >> products
> >> >> >> >> whose
> >> >> >> >> production involved the death of animals is
> >> >> >> >> absolutely
> >> >> >> >> prohibited? I
> >> >> >> >> don't think you can.
> >> >> >> ==================
> >> >> >> Then why the ignorant prohibition on buying meat?
> >> >> >> Obviouly
> >> >> >> it
> >> >> >> really has NOTHING to do with animal death and
> >> >> >> suffering,
> >> >> >> then,
> >> >> >> eh killer?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I believe that the most practical way to minimize one's
> >> >> > contribution to
> >> >> > animal suffering is to be vegan.
> >> >> ====================
> >> >> A contention that you have never proen, or even tried to
> >> >> support
> >> >> with any data.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > I have pointed out that veganism avoids support of intensive
> >> > rearing of
> >> > animals, I have pointed out that animal food production
> >> > requires more
> >> > plant production than plant food production,
> >> ============================
> >> No, you have repeated a vegan ly. There is NO requirment to
> >> grow
> >> crops for animals, fool. None.
> >>
> >
> > Most animals do require crops to be grown to feed them,
> ======================
> No ool, they do not 'require' crops to be fed to them...
>
>
> and most animal
> > food production does require more plant production than plant
> > food
> > production. There are exceptions.
> ======================
> Nio fool, again there is no requirment....
>

Well, most animal food production does actually *involve* more plant
production than plant food production. I don't think it's stretching
language too much to say it requires it. The way it's actually done, it
requires it. I'm afraid I'm not very clear on whether there's any
significant point you wanted to make here.

>
> >
> >>
> >> and I have linked to an
> >> > article that discusses Davis' model of ruminant-pasture food
> >> > production
> >> > and compares it with a vegan model. You, on the other hand,
> >> > have never
> >> > supported your contention that it is possible to cause less
> >> > suffering
> >> > than that caused by a vegan diet by eating some meat. You
> >> > might
> >> > be
> >> > right in this, but you have never proven it, or even tried
> >> > to
> >> > support
> >> > it with any data.
> >> =========================
> >> Yes, I have killer. Many times, and long before you arrived.
> >> But then, you should know that, since afterall, you did all
> >> that
> >> research, right killer?
> >>
> >
> > You really are quite bizarre. You think that somehow my claim
> > to have
> > made an informed decision to become vegan entails that I should
> > have
> > gone through all the Usenet archives to find out what arguments
> > you
> > have offered in the past? If you want to convince me, just
> > present me
> > with the arguments.
> ======================
> Dodge noted fool.
>

What dodge? It's a reasonable request, isn't it? Shouldn't we be
talking about your dodge?

>
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Perhaps there are also some ways of
> >> >> > doing this that involve buying some meat. I'm interested
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > hear any
> >> >> > evidence you have about this matter.
> >> >> ===============
> >> >> No you aren't. You'e a closed-minded fool that makes
> >> >> claims
> >> >> that
> >> >> you cannot support.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Um, yeah. Really intelligent. Really cogent argument. Keep
> >> > up
> >> > the good
> >> > work.
> >> =================
> >> Kinda sounded like you, didn't it? Where's your proof, fool?
> >>
> >
> > No, it didn't really sound much like me. I'm not that hostile
> > and
> > insulting, and I also usually only make claims that I can
> > support by
> > argument.
> ======================
> I agree, you're far too stupid to emulate....
>
>
> >
> > Where's my proof of what?
> ================
> Of everything you have claimed so-far....
>

I've repeated it quite a number of times. Read my previous posts.

>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I see, so it's fine to cause death and suffering of
> >> >> >> > animals
> >> >> >> > when it fits conveniently into your chosen lifestyle
> >> >> >> > but
> >> >> >> > not
> >> >> >> > when it fits into mine.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> What I do think is that we should make every
> >> >> >> >> reasonable effort to minimize our contribution to the
> >> >> >> >> suffering of
> >> >> >> >> animals.
> >> >> >> ====================
> >> >> >> Then why are you posting to usenet, killer?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > It's not clear to me that posting to usenet contributes
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > suffering of animals.
> >> >> =======================
> >> >> O course it isn't clear to you, killer. Anything that
> >> >> contradicts your fantasy is just ignored. So much or all
> >> >> that
> >> >> research you did on your lifestylr choices and animal death
> >> >> and
> >> >> suffering fool. Ty looking up power poduction and
> >> >> communications
> >> >> as a start, killer.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Well, maybe I will.
> >> =============
> >> see below, i did your "research" for you...
> >>
> >> But perhaps first you could address this point for
> >> > me: How do I contribute to power production and
> >> > communications
> >> > infrastructure by posting to usenet? My family would use
> >> > this
> >> > computer
> >> > regardless of whether I posted to usenet.
> >> ====================
> >> For what "need"? There is no survial need to use a computer.
> >> Your selfish interest in entertainemnt is part of, and drives,
> >> and ever increasing demand for more power generation and
> >> communications. You "could" make a difference, according to
> >> your
> >> vegan argument, by eliminating all useage of your computer and
> >> communications.
> >
> > No, I couldn't. My family would still use the computer and pay
> > for the
> > internet connection. The amount of suffering caused would be
> > the same.
> ========================
> ROTFLMAO Then how do you make any difference by banning meat?
> You really are just too stupid for this, aen't you. Afterall,
> it's the same argument, killer.
>

By my not eating meat, less financial support is provided for cruel
farming practices. That isn't the case here.

>
> >
> >> You won't, because, as has been proven, a
> >> concern for animals is not really what you are about. If it
> >> were, you wouldn't be tracking your bloody footprints all over
> >> the world.
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> And I have done my homework on that, I believe that the
> >> >> >> best
> >> >> >> >> way to do it is to become vegan.
> >> >> >> ==============================
> >> >> >> ROTFLMAO You've done zero homework fool. Propaganda
> >> >> >> doesn't
> >> >> >> mean anything. Tell use how many animals died for your
> >> >> >> diet
> >> >> >> prior to your conversion, and how many now die after
> >> >> >> your
> >> >> >> conversion.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > There was some discussion of this issue in the article I
> >> >> > linked
> >> >> > to.
> >> >> ==================
> >> >> No fool, YOU claimed that the best way was to be vegan,
> >> >> because
> >> >> YOU researched it! It's quite obvious that that was a ly.
> >> >> You
> >> >> have researched nothing! You read a few propaganda sites
> >> >> and
> >> >> declare yourself vituous... What a hoot!
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > I'm sorry, I'm not following you here. I didn't read a few
> >> > propaganda
> >> > sites, I read a few philosophy books.
> >> ==============================
> >> ROTFLMAO And what data did they provide for you? Obviously
> >> none!
> >>
> >
> > Wrong.
> ================
> Then provide the 'data' that they provided you, fool. Should be
> easy, right killer?
>

I've given the references.

>
>
> >
> >>
> >> I don't see how you've refuted my
> >> > claim that I obtained some information and decided on the
> >> > basis
> >> > of it
> >> > that veganism would reduce my contribution to animal
> >> > suffering.
> >> =====================
> >> Because you have yet to support that claim with any data,
> >> fool.
> >
> > Also wrong.
> ==================
> No, true. All you've done so far is make claims. You have yet
> to provide any proof for any of them.
>

No, actually, it's wrong.

>
> >
> >> You claimed you cause ewer animals to suffer and die. Prove
> >> it!
> >>
> >
> > I gave my arguments once again above.
> =================
> No fool, you didn't. Provide your proof!
>

I've repeated the arguments enough times. Read my posts.

>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> If you've got some suggestions for how
> >> >> >> >> I can do better I'm happy to listen to them.
> >> >> >> ====================
> >> >> >> You've been given them, killer.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > This is simply a lie. Stop evading the question and
> >> >> > answer
> >> >> > it.
> >> >> ================
> >> >> No it is not a ly, fool. You claimed to have done the
> >> >> research,
> >> >> and it's now benn proven that you lied. If yu had, you
> >> >> would
> >> >> easily find what we ae talking about.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > I read some information about modern farming techniques, and
> >> > concluded
> >> > on that basis that veganism would contribute less to animal
> >> > suffering.
> >> ======================
> >> Then yu are even more stupid than I thought.
> >>
> >>
> >> > I have read about Davis' model for pasture-ruminant
> >> > production,
> >> > but I
> >> > have my doubts that contributing to such production would
> >> > reduce my
> >> > contribution to animal suffering, for reasons outlined in
> >> > the
> >> > article I
> >> > linked to. I haven't come across any other suggestions for
> >> > reducing my
> >> > contribution to animal suffering beyond what I do by going
> >> > vegan.
> >> ====================
> >> And you have yet to support that claim. I'll wait. Make up
> >> any
> >> numbers you like....
> >>
> >
> > I have supported the claim. I've even linked to an article
> > which has
> > got a few numbers in it.
> =======================
> No fool, you have not provided anything. One ppopaganda article
> isn't proof.
>

I have provided something, and if you want to dismiss the article, I
think you should address the arguments contained in it.

>
>
> >
> >>
> >> > Perhaps this reflects poorly on the amount of research I've
> >> > done.
> >> > Whatever. You claimed that you had given me some
> >> > suggestions,
> >> > and this
> >> > is simply false. I'm still waiting for you to give me some.
> >> > It's
> >> > getting very boring.
> >> ================
> >> hen you didn't look, did you?
> >>
> >
> > Yes, I did. Still waiting for your suggestions.
> ==============
> No, you didn't...
>
>
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> And if you HAD done your
> >> >> >> homework, which you just exposed as a ly, you would know
> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> thee are alternatives.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > A typical vegan could reduce the net amount of animal
> >> >> >> > death
> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> > suffering associated with his or her diet by the
> >> >> >> > introduction
> >> >> >> > of some carefully selected meat, fish or game, a
> >> >> >> > person
> >> >> >> > who
> >> >> >> > supplements their diet by hunting or fishing for
> >> >> >> > example.
> >> >> >> > Also
> >> >> >> > a person who also grows much of their own food *and*
> >> >> >> > consumes
> >> >> >> > meat probably does much better than that typical urban
> >> >> >> > vegan.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Don't misunderstand, I am not suggesting you do these
> >> >> >> > things, I
> >> >> >> > am just asking you to acknowledge that they are viable
> >> >> >> > choices.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> I'm not altogether convinced that the suggestion
> >> >> >> >> "stop
> >> >> >> >> supporting
> >> >> >> >> commerical agriculture" is entirely feasible for me.
> >> >> >> >> If
> >> >> >> >> you've
> >> >> >> >> got some
> >> >> >> >> ideas as to how I can do it I'm happy to listen to
> >> >> >> >> those,
> >> >> >> >> as
> >> >> >> >> well.
> >> >> >> ====================
> >> >> >> LOL You mean anything that won't be an inconvenience or
> >> >> >> violate
> >> >> >> your simple rule for your simple mind, right killer?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > No.
> >> >> > ================
> >> >> Yes, obviously. Because of everything in your life that
> >> >> causes
> >> >> massive animal death and suffering, all YOU cry about is
> >> >> those
> >> >> that eat meat.
> >> >
> >> > I believe I have a moral obligation to minimize my
> >> > contribution
> >> > to
> >> > animal suffering.
> >> ==================
> >> Yet are not doing that, and have failed to prove you even try.
> >>
> >
> > How about an argument for why I'm not doing that?
> ===========================
> Why an 'argument?' You prove it with each and every inane post
> to usenet, killer.
>

Well, I'm not convinced of that, for the reasons I've given.

>
> >
> >>
> >> I do my best to live up to it. I don't think I've
> >> > been "crying" about those who eat meat, but I do think it's
> >> > a
> >> > shame
> >> > that some people contribute to cruel farming practices more
> >> > than they
> >> > have to, and meat-eating frequently involves this.
> >> ================
> >> Your crop production ALWAYS does...
> >>
> >
> > No. Buying plant products isn't necessarily contributing to
> > cruel
> > farming practices more than you have to.
> ==================
> ROTFLMAO
>
>
>
> >
> >> I am open to
> >> > conviction about whether eating some meat might be
> >> > compatible
> >> > with
> >> > minimizing one's contribution to animal suffering. I'm still
> >> > waiting
> >> > for someone to provide a practical suggestion for further
> >> > reducing my
> >> > contribution to animal suffering together with evidence that
> >> > it
> >> > will
> >> > actually do this. It's a simple enough request. Why don't
> >> > you
> >> > respond
> >> > to it instead of engaging in gratuitous abuse?
> >> ================
> >> Becaause it has been presented many times. I you wee really
> >> open
> >> minded and looking for real answers, you'd find it.
> >>
> >
> > I see. You refuse to actually present the suggestion or provide
> > a link
> > to it, but the burden is still on me to go through the usenet
> > archives
> > and find it. Well, I have had a look, and I may have another
> > one. But
> > do you have any particular reason for not just presenting the
> > suggestion? I've asked you quite a few times now.
> ====================
> Look fool. You made a crap-load of claims, none of which you
> have ever backed up with any data. When you do that, come on
> back. Until then, you're just another ignorant vegan wannabe
> that is too stupid, and too ignorant to know what they are
> talking about...
>

And until you provide some arguments, you haven't given me any reason
to change my views.

>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> Something YOU have no control over. You focus on
> >> >> what others are doing because it is far easier than
> >> >> actually
> >> >> doing anything in YOUR life to make a real difference.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Yeah. Right. Whatever you say. As I say, I'll be interested
> >> > to
> >> > hear any
> >> > suggestions you have for how I can make more of a difference
> >> > than I
> >> > already have. But I'm beginning to suspect you're more
> >> > interested in
> >> > just tossing out insults.
> >> ====================
> >> And you'e more interested in remaining an ignorant,
> >> brainwashed
> >> loon, eh?
> >>
> >
> > Oh, for heaven's sake. Why don't you just provide some
> > suggestions?
> > It's pathetic.
> =================
> Why don't you provide some proof for your claims, fool. THAT'S
> what is pathetic...
> Especially when you snip out tons of data that tells you you have
> been lying....
>

I'm sorry, can you link to the post I snipped that contained all this
data?

>
> >
> > [rest deleted]
> >