On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 13:01:06 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
><dh@.> wrote
>> On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 11:28:19 -0700, "Dutch" asked:
>>
>>>Answer the question. Is it not unethical to represent quotes that your
>>>opponent categorically rejects?
>>
>> You Goos do it to me all the time. Walk the walk or shut the ****
>> up about it!
>
>There's nothing that you have said in the past that you now categorically
>reject which I quote as your current position. It has always been your basic
>position since you were a stupid kid that we do livestock animals a favor by
>giving them the chance to experience life. Your words today convey that same
>message when you say you consider their lives as well as their deaths. As
>soon as you categorically reject that basic position I will immediately stop
>attributing it to you, and I will congratulate you and toast to your good
>health.

I'm not going to unlearn what I've learned, much less accept your
disgusting inconsideration for livestock. In order to accept your position
I would have to develop the same revulsion you have for eating animals,
and THEN somehow learn to completely disregard the fact that it's all
they get simply to selfishly support that particular personal mental problem.
No, you can forget about it.

>I will NOT quote a position as yours once you reject it

Of course I don't believe that shit, but I'll keep the quote for when you
end up proving yourself a liar about it.