View Single Post
  #64 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals
Derek[_2_] Derek[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 215
Default Conversations in the other room: was Vagan question, getting started.

On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 16:13:38 -0600, Glorfindel > wrote:

>If you're going to tell lies about me, Derek, you might have
>the courtesy to do so in a newsgroup where I will read
>them, not behind my back.


I've not lied about you, and the newsgroup[s] I've
been posting to are frequented by both of us, so
stop lying.

>I don't know what Leif/Jon has on you


If he had anything on me you can be sure he'd
use it, so no, try something else.

[..]
>Why not learn from real AR supporters


Since Bob Farrell and Michael Cerkowski left years
ago there are no genuine AR types here apart from
myself. All that's left here are the antis, zoophiles,
zoophile apologists, a mixed-up utilitarian who thinks
he's a deontologist, and liars like Lesley who trades
horses and promotes herself as a vegan while at the
same time following a lacto-ovo-vegetarian diet.

Let's take you, for example. Do you REALLY think
I can learn anything worthwhile from a zoophile who
also promotes sex between children and "responsible
paedophiles", who got thrown out of her parish for
being a threat to the children there, and who now can't
go back to her new parish for those same reasons?
No, the only AR tutors left here are those against the
proposition who reveal the flaws in those who think
they're genuine proponents. Like you say, Jon "knows
what the ethical arguments for AR" are and "could
write a book defending AR if [he] wanted to do it."

[..]
>>Rupert is a utilitarian, not the deontological rightist he
>>claims to be.

>
>We must make some use of utilitarian calculation in the
>real world in order to help real animals.


Then you have no argument against Mercer who uses
that same utilitarian thinking while vivisecting animals
to help "real animals" (whatever they are) and people.
You see, you're not a deontological rightist like you
claim to be; you're a mixed-up utilitarian who believes
that it is morally permissible to kill rights-holding beings
in the hope that it will prevent large-scale harms to
others. You're completely lost, and so you hop from
one philosophy to the other without even realising it.
Stop kidding yourself, Karen; you aren't the clear-
thinking rightist you want to be - you're a utilitarian,
a pervert who debases animals by availing yourself as
their sexual partner, and a liar.