View Single Post
  #66 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals
William[_2_] William[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default Where's everybody gone?


"chico chupacabra" > wrote in message
...
> William wrote:
>
>>>>> He was a lying criminal
>>>> Then how can you believe him, and why repeat his lies as being the truth about
>>>> Pearl?
>>>> This hate campaign against Pearl is over before it starts if the ONLY evidence
>>>> supporting it comes from someone you know to be a lying criminal. LOL
>>>>
>>>> cut
>>> She willingly had plenty to do with him, and therefore is most likely
>>> quite comfortable with dishonesty.

>>
>> No. You only have the word of a lying criminal to go on.

>
> A criminal she willfully married.


A lying criminal you willingly believe.

>That should tell you something of her character. Rather, lack of it.


The same must also apply to you then.

>> Also, Goo has a list of absurd things
>>> that she believes, and she insists she doesn't believe in some of them
>>> though amusingly she can't say which of them she thinks she doesn't
>>> believe in...even when asked!

>>
>> I've seen her reject at least two items on that list today. Read her posts.

>
> She didn't reject it outright, dummy. Go back and look. It was qualified in every
> clause:
> "*IF* it's contrary to an animals' [sic] instinct *AND* requires
> conditioning *OR* abuse..."
>
> Why can't she just come right out and categorically say, "It's always wrong to
> molest animals"?


She sees artificial insemination as a kind of rape for crying out loud, so I'd say
that she does believe it's always wrong to molest animals.

>>> This is a very strange situation indeed,

>>
>> The only strange situation going on here is your hate campaign against her and
>> your
>> refusal to accept the fact that she rejects at least two of the things you're all
>> accusing
>> her of.

>
> She didn't reject it outright, dummy. Go back and look. It was qualified in every
> clause:
> "*IF* it's contrary to an animals' [sic] instinct *AND* requires
> conditioning *OR* abuse..."
>
> Why can't she just come right out and categorically say, "It's always wrong to
> molest animals"?


I believe she already has done.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com