View Single Post
  #47 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to talk.politics.animals,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,misc.rural
Rupert Rupert is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,380
Default skirt-boy: burden of proof not met

On Jul 30, 1:53 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> 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.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


"Defensive"? Don't see that. Seems to may I made a pretty succint and
rational commentary on the situation, worded as neutrally as possible.
I simply stated the facts about what your perspective is on the
situation and what my perspective is on the situation. And I wondered
whether it might be possible to discuss something more interesting.

I don't see any sensible reason why you would care whether I'm a
hypocrite. But apparently you take great joy in claiming that I am.
Fine. Well, if I thought you had a point, I would have some reason to
care about that, since I care about not being hypocritical. But, since
I think that your arguments on this matter are a joke, like pretty
much everything else you say, I don't really have any rational reason
to care all that much. All right, you have a low opinion of me, well,
I can live with that. I think that your opinion is a joke and that you
are a ridiculous clown. So I really haven't got any particular reason
to be defensive. And I wasn't being defensive, I stated the facts
about what we both think in a neutral way and asked if we could move
on to something more interesting.