dh@. wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 03:45:55 -0700, Rupert > wrote:
>
>> On Jul 29, 7:28 am, Kickin' Goober's Faggot Ass
>> > wrote:
>>> On Jul 28, 9:24 am, 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, 3:22 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Guppy the Corpse Pumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 27, 2:08 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 27, 12:52 pm, 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?
>>>>>>>>>>> It is not self-evident. In fact, it is more likely self-evidently
>>>>>>>>>>> false.
>>>>>>>>>> More proof that
>>>>>>>>> The proposition of equal moral considerability of
>>>>>>>>> animals (with humans) is self evidently false.
>>>>>>>> Well, surely if I can be criticized for making an assertion without
>>>>>>>> meeting by burden of proof, then this assertion of yours here can
>>>>>>>> equally be criticized on that basis.
>>>>>>> I'm just following your lead.
>>>>>> I see. Well, that blabber of mine to which I directed you
>>>>> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz- Hide quoted text -
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>> So, may I take it that you have no cogent criticisms to make of my
>>>> talk?
>>> You're kidding, right?
>>>
>>> Goo will dismiss your talk entirely without having read or heard it.
>>>
>>> Only Goo is wise.
>>>
>>> Only Goo knows.
>>>
>> Yes, I've often thought how great it would be to know everything, like
>> him. Like the way he knows that all the male activists at Animal
>> Liberation, including me, are queer, and the way he knows that the
>> mathematical paper I'm working on is rubbish, and the way he knows
>> that I'm seething with rage at him as opposed to roaring with
>> laughter,
>
> Since Rudy makes up whatever he wants

No. Rudy demonstrates repeatedly that you are a liar,
and that you believe in weird, irrational bullshit
about "pre-existent" animals:


Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
born if nothing prevents that from happening,
that would experience the loss if their lives
are prevented.
****wit - 08/01/2000

The animals that will be raised for us to eat
are more than just "nothing", because they
*will* be born unless something stops their
lives from happening. Since that is the case,
if something stops their lives from happening,
whatever it is that stops it is truly "denying"
them of the life they otherwise would have had.
****wit - 12/09/1999

What gives you the right to want to deprive
them [unborn animals] of having what life they
could have?
****wit - 10/12/2001


You lost, ****wit. And you're too stupid to see it.