FoodBanter.com - View Single Post

chico chupacabra

wrote:

> chico chupacabra wrote:
>
wrote:
>>
>>
>>>chico chupacabra wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Karen Winter, former house-whore of the Society for Creative
>>>>Anachronisms commune, wrote:
>>>>
>>>><...>
>>>>
>>>>>>>You keep confirming the fact that you're pro-bestiality.
>>>>>
>>>>>>No. You just keep intentionally mis-interpreting what I'm saying.
>>>>>
>>>>>*Intentionally* is the key word.
>>>>
>>>>No, Karen. Lesley has repeatedly equivocated on the issue. She's written
>>>>that it's a perversion but should be tolerated; she's written that it's
>>>>okay as long as it doesn't involve conditioning or coercion and then
>>>>failed to respond appropriately when asked when it does NOT involve
>>>>conditioning or coercion; she's written that it's nobody else's business
>>>>if someone ****s an animal even though she finds it patently offensive
>>>>if someone eats an animal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>He knows you condemn it;
>>>>
>>>>One doesn't condone what one condemns; the two are mutually exclusive.
>>>>Lesley condones bestiality. She doesn't condemn it. She has only offered
>>>>qualified objections to it while firmly insisting that it be legal.
>>>>
>>>><...>
>>>>
>>>>>Having been a vegetarian for over 20 years,
>>>>
>>>>You have not been. Your depraved FAS-defective sidekick Sylvia wrote
>>>>that you had chiles rellenos when you returned to Santa Fe.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I would gag at the thought of eating any meat,
>>>>
>>>>You should gag at the thought of munching that old bat's carpet.
>>>>
>
>
> Her sexual activities are none of your business,

Then tell her to keep it all in her closet. She's been disgustingly
candid about her sexual preferences and practices, everything from S&M
to NAMBLA to bestiality. And now we know she's engaged in the latter
with a poor cockatiel.

> you disgusting homophobe.

Nothing I wrote was "homophobic." That's your pathetic PC term which
ignores its core meaing, "fear of oneself," to impugn others with whom,
you disagree because you're either unwilling or unable to discuss the
merits of the arguments before you.

>>>>>even roadkill.
>>>>
>>>>Even? *Especially* roadkill.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>But I would not want
>>>>>to pass a law forbidding people to eat roadkill
>>>>
>>>>What about those who want to eat normal meat? Why do you object to that
>>>>in a manner similar to my objections to bestiality and pedophilia,
>>>>Karen? What is it about eating meat or wearing leather or fur that's
>>>>less noble than sexually assaulting a minor or a defenseless animal?
>>>
>>>
>>>Surely you can not be so stupid as to be unaware of what she thinks the
>>>morally relevant difference is.
>>
>>I want her to answer the questions and explain why she finds it morally
>>acceptable for someone to sexually abuse an animal but not to eat it.
>>Feel free to give it a stab yourself, numbnuts.
>
> Not if that's going to be your level of courtesy.

Here's my level of courtesy to you, you prating windbag: **** yourself
with a broken bottle.

> As I say,

I know what you say, "I cannot answer ____ [fill in the blank with Mr
Erikson, Mr Dutch, Mr Nash, et al] so I'll demand civility instead." ****.

> I really
> cannot comprehend how you could fail to grasp what her answer would be.

I want to know why she finds it morally acceptable to jack off a
cockatiel -- repeatedly, no doubt -- but offensive to eat a small bite
of a vegetable dish that contains a tiny piece of bacon for flavoring.

> I will explain it to you if you're prepared to be civil.

Here's all the civility you deserve, prat:
*extending middle finger and waving it*

Answer the question and stop being such a drama queen.