Martin Willett wrote:
> ant and dec wrote:
> > Martin Willett wrote:
> >
> >> ant and dec wrote:
> >>
> >>> Martin Willett wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> First published on http://mwillett.org/mind/eat-me.htm
> >>>> posted by the author
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> A factually incorrect diatribe attempting to justify the consumption
> >>> of meat.
> >>>
> >>> A troll.
> >>
> >>
> >> How do you make that out?
> >
> >
> > It was wrong. It is a diatribe. Humour is often used as a mollifying
> > device for mental conflict, perhaps caused by your recognition of your
> > own hypocrisy.
> >
> >
>
> I don't have a problem with hypocrisy, I make a rule not to eat anything
> smarter than a pig, unless I really have to. Fortunately that rule
> doesn't restrict my diet very much. I have a lot of respect for the
> intelligence of pigs. Chimp chops? No thanks!
>
> > >>
> > It strikes me you simply haven't got an answer
> >
> >> to the points I made.
> >
> >
> > Does a diatribe have a point?
>
> Why restrict yourself to one?
>
> >
> >>
> >> I get accused of many things, writing stuff full of facts is rarely
> >> one of them. What was incorrect?
> >
> >
> > Salmon, as *one* example is a carnivorous species that we eat as a
> > common food.
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salmon
>
> How is this a contradiction?
>
> "The only carnivorous species that we eat on a regular basis are fish,
> animals that some people who call themselves vegetarians even try to
> redefine as some sort of vegetable. I've news for you veggies, haddock
> are animals that eat other animals, being cold bloodied, small-eyed and
> ugly doesn't change anything, fish are not vegetables. If you eat fish
> you cannot be a vegetarian."
>
> >
> >>
> >> Do veg*ns never use the hypocrisy of eating meat and not wanting to be
> >> eaten as a claim to a higher moral stance?
> >
> >
> > What higher moral stance? Different morals perhaps. Why do you feel they
> > claim a higher moral stance and why? Perhaps it's your perception of
> > your own morality.

If people decide to avoid animal source food products for perceived
ethical reasons as the vast majority of vegans do then it follows
they must consider this to be a higher moral stance.

> Oh come on. Veg*ns ooze their sense of moral superiority like Christians
> and Buddhists, they use it as part of their locomotion, like slugs. Of
> course they make a point of not *claiming* moral superiority while doing
> all they can to ensure that other people get the message loud and clear.
> Their entire bearing says "we're not claiming to be superior to you, oh
> no, that would be rude and arrogant and not *nice*, but you do know that
> you are inferior to us, don't you? You don't? Here, take a pamphlet,
> it's all in there."

Since you obviously have a problem with it perhaps you might like to
give
veg*ns some advice. Should they avoid acting in what they consider to
be the morally superior fashion in case it makes other people feel
uncomfortable? Show they avoid trying to educate people whom they
believe have similar moral values but eat animal products out of
ignorance?
How would you act if you agreed with their views about the raising or
killing of animals?

> >> Do you think I *couldn't* find evidence of such an argument being
> >> deployed if I could be arsed to do so?
> >
> >
> > It is used by some.
>
> Quite. If the cap fits, wear it.
>
> >
> >>
> >> Was I wrong in my analysis that more people eat "noble" salmon and
> >> deer than "nasty" hyaenas and tapeworms?
> >
> >
> > More people eat salmon than tapeworms, none are more "noble" or "nasty"
> > than each other.
>
> People do not eat nasty animals. At least they don't like to think that
> they do. Muslims for example are taught to vilify pigs as well as not to
> eat them. I am not suggesting that species are objectively noble or
> nasty, that isn't the point, but the perceptions vary. We don't eat rats
> and cockroaches but we do eat prawns, which in turn eat marine carrion
> and excrement, but we put that image from our minds, even to the point
> of calling the alimentary canal of a prawn "just a vein", when in fact
> it clearly is scum sucker shit.
>
> >
> >>
> >> In what way did I justify the consumption of meat? I didn't. I simply
> >> took apart one of the arguments sometimes used against meat eating and
> >> showed it to be rather farcical.
> >
> >
> > You've recognised your own hypocrisy, and have attempted to make joke
> > out of it.
>
> I endeavour to make a joke out of most things.
>
> Sometimes I even succeed.
>
> >
> >>
> >> I posted this here because I was looking to see if anybody could come
> >> up with any good case against me. Of course the original piece was
> >> designed to be humorous (do veg*ns do humour?) and was not intended to
> >> win any debate. I run a website that tackles dozens of issues, I don't
> >> have a single-issue agenda. I've been doing this kind of stuff for six
> >> years now and I've never been hounded out of any newsgroup and neither
> >> has any newsgroup ever disbanded because they've been blown away by
> >> the power of my analysis and rapier-like wit (with the possible
> >> exception of alt.religion.christian.amish, but I think they had a few
> >> philosophical difficulties before I showed up). I am here to stimulate
> >> a conversation, not a conversion. I haven't insulted you so I'd
> >> appreciate it if you didn't insult me. If you don't want to engage
> >> with me then fine, don't do it. But please don't do other people's
> >> thinking for them by hanging a ready-made hate label round my neck.
> >
> >
> > I don't hate you. From what I can see you seem a quite a nice guy!
>
> Thanks, but it does annoy me when people are so quick to hang the
> ready-made labels around people's necks. "He's just a troll." I am much
> more than that.
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >> I've just re-read your post. Is "A Troll" your usual signature? I
> >> apologize if I misinterpreted the nature of your post.
> >
> >
> > If you were looking for a good case against you, perhaps you should have
> > written something for that purpose.
> >
> > Your response has made me reconsider your troll status!
> >
>
> Good. My troll status is something I am very proud of. I am not your
> common or garden troll. http://www.mwillett.org/troll.htm
>
>
> --
> Martin Willett
>
>
> http://mwillett.org