On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 02:03:05 GMT, usual suspect > wrote:
>Derek wrote:
>>
>>>>First you're vegan,
>>>
>>>I called myself that under the misconception that veganism was about
>>>food rather than animal rights.
>>
>> You declared yourself vegan because you claimed
>>
>> 1) to "dislike flesh"
>
>That's correct, with the exception of fish.
You didn't mention that exception when making
your statement about your dislike for flesh. Being
the liar that you've most certainly proved to be, I
reject your ad hoc exception as just another lie
and back pedaling.
>> 2) that "the consumption of meat, dairy, and eggs is
>> bad for me, animals, my environment, and the
>> whole world"
>> 3) that "no animal must die for my nourishment or
>> enjoyment"
>
>I now distinguish between healthful and unhealthful diets
Then you lied when claiming that the consumption of
flesh was bad for you. And what about the claim that
eating flesh was bad for the environment and the
World? Was that just another lie, or have you now
come to the conclusion that it isn't bad for the animals
and the World after all? Also, you've failed to address
the part where you claimed that no animal must die
for your nourishment or enjoyment. You're full of shit.
>My position now is consistent
Your position is never consistent;
"I am vegan"
usual suspect 2002-05-09
"First, don't EVER call me "a vegan" or even just "vegan."
usual suspect 2003-06-10
"No thanks, I'm a vegan."
usual suspect 2003-08-14
"You'll find my views have been consistent."
usual suspect 2003-09-05
What a joke!
>> Also, in answer to Bart who asked you whether
>> our dominion over animals includes eating and
>> slaughtering them for food, you answered no by
>> quoting Genesis 1:29-30 (New King James Version)
>>
>> [start Bart to you]
>> > So, according to the bible, God gave us dominion
>> > over the animal kingdom.
>> [you]
>> Does dominion include slaughtering and eating them? The
>> answer is found immediately following one of the verses
>> you quoted:
>>
>> Genesis 1:29-30 (New King James Version) -- And God
>> said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed
>> which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose
>> fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. Also, to every
>> beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything
>> that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given
>> every green herb for food"; and it was so.
>> [end]
>> usual suspect 11 Jun 2002 http://tinyurl.com/4jtz8
>
>Upon further study, I ceded that the account of Noah following the flood
>mitigated that isolated passage.
You were already aware of other passages from the
bible which mentions meat, but you still used the above
passage to indicate that our dominion over animals does
not include killing them. So, once again we can see
your lies and back pedaling when cornered on these
issues.
>> As for your later assertion, that you've NEVER held
>> a belief in the proposition of animal rights, read on and
>> see where you claim NOT to know that answer.
>>
>> "Animals are not moral agents and generally operate
>> by instinct and conditioning (the same can be said of
>> far too many humans). Animals should be afforded
>> protection under the law. But are they endowed with
>> any rights by their creator? I do not know that answer.
>> usual suspect Date: 2002-06-12
>
>It's a theological question, Derk, and in the above I refused to presume
>the answer. I don't *know* if God endowed them with any rights
Then you have no grounds for your puny attacks
on others who believe animals hold moral rights
against us.
>> You're a
>
>You're a cuckold:
> I am sure he will tell you that I have shagged his wife and its
> true I will admit that.
> David "Judas" Nash - http://tinyurl.com/n292
You throw that up at every opportunity when
cornered into reviewing your lies. I'm not in
the least phased by it, but it does show your
desperation to use anything to avoid being
seen as a liar, and that in itself is useful to me.