View Single Post
  #45 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to talk.politics.animals,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,misc.rural
Rudy Canoza[_1_] Rudy Canoza[_1_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 282
Default skirt-boy: burden of proof not met

Rupert wrote:
> On Jul 29, 1:55 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>> Rupert wrote:
>>> On Jul 29, 1:10 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>> On Jul 29, 12:58 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jul 28, 4:52 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jul 28, 1:09 pm, Dutch > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 28, 8:31 am, Dutch > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> shrubkiller wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 27, 1:42 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rupie, you lisping fruit: you assert that (non-human)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals are due equal moral consideration (compared
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with humans). You haven't established that. Get busy,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you lisping utilitarian fruit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why would anyone have to prove something which is SELF EVIDENT?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ****! ................are you ever stupid.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why would anyone think that is self-evident when it is so self-evidently
>>>>>>>>>>>> NOT? Nobody gives animals "equal consideration",
>>>>>>>>>>> I do.
>>>>>>>>>> No you don't, you just think it sounds like the right thing for you to
>>>>>>>>>> say. The moment anyone tried to pin you down on it the word "equal"
>>>>>>>>>> would immediately lose it's usual meaning and the goalposts on wheels
>>>>>>>>>> would appear.
>>>>>>>>> I show equal consideration for nonhuman animals, because I blah blah blah
>>>>>>>> You contribute to animal death.
>>>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>> You violate your so-called beliefs.
>>>>> No.
>>>> Yes - daily.
>>> No, I don't

>> Yes, you do - daily. You're massively hypocritical.

>
> Yawn.


Uh-huh - NOT. You're still defensive, and with good
reason.