On May 31, 11:38 am, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > wrote
>
> > For years "aras" have been insisting that we give no consideration to
> > the lives of livestock. Some have taken it to the extent of insisting that
> > we must never consider the lives of anything, though those in that
> > position from time to time also pretend to understand the value of some
> > lives, for some never explained reason(s). So what are we allowed to
> > consider? It is okay to consider the lives of any of the following, when
> > considering human influence on animals:
>
> What do you mean by "consider"? Be more explicit.

I would never tell you what to do, but I would suggest that in
replying to a blatant ****wit David Harrison sock puppet, you should
always be sure to include something to the effect that you recognize
it as a sloppily put together sock puppet, and heap some ridicule on
him for doing it.