"Anybody" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On May 31, 3:03 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>> On May 31, 1:26 pm, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > "Rudy Canoza" > wrote in message
>>
>> oups.com...
>>
>> > > On May 31, 11:50 am, "Dutch" > wrote:
>> > >> <dh@.> wrote in
>> > >> messagenews:kq2u53hktgjepn7dq0sr3edheqhk2esgs5@4ax .com...
>> > >> > On 30 May 2007 12:41:47 -0700, Goo wrote:
>>
>> > >> >>They have no intrinsic moral meaning until and unless
>> > >> >>the livestock exist.
>>
>> > >> > If you think you have any clue about any of this Goo,
>> > >> > then attempt to explain any sort of meaning you're able
>> > >> > to comprehend and appreciate regarding livestock who
>> > >> > do exist. Don't even refer to your imaginary nonexistent
>> > >> > "entities" Goobs, just try to tell us about the real ones.
>>
>> > >> Livestock who exist only need us to pay attention to their welfare.
>> > >> What
>> > >> benefit do you imagine your "appreciation" gives them? I'll tell
>> > >> you,
>> > >> Zero.
>>
>> > > Exactly right. That was a great comment you made about the welfare
>> > > in
>> > > their lives, rather than "their lives", that merits any
>> > > consideration.
>>
>> > > ****wit is still trying to get people to think the livestock "ought"
>> > > to exist, for moral reasons, and he just can't do it. He has wasted
>> > > eight years of his life - but no big loss, because his time is
>> > > worthless - trying to get people on board with him, and so far no one
>> > > has. No one ever will.
>>
>> > >> It's your misguided, blundering way to deal with the accusations of
>> > >> ARAs
>> > >> who
>> > >> say that it's cruel to raise livestock.
>>
>> > > Yep. ****wit is too stupid to realize it, but he is essentially
>> > > acknowledging that "aras" are right. He is so ****ing stupid...
>>
>> > He arrogantly believes that he has discovered a clever way to turn
>> > their own
>> > argument back on them.
>>
>> I told him that back in 1999.
>>
>> > He thinks that it's inconsistent to wish for the
>> > liberation of animals when that liberation would result in the
>> > elimination
>> > of the very species of animals you are liberating. He can't understand
>> > that
>> > it simply doesn't matter if livestock species exist or not, apart from
>> > their
>> > utility, nobody cares.
>>
>> Certainly not the "prevented" livestock themselves.
>>
>> > You're right, by imparting this false importance to
>> > their existence he is unwittingly supporting the AR position. I
>> > emphasize
>> > *unwittingly* because that characterizes him to a tee. He needs to get
>> > a
>> > clue in order to be a half-wit.
>>
>> Even as a half-wit, he'd still be ****wit.
>
>
> When are you and Douche going into your Net-cop routine Goo?
>
> Surely there must be some spelling felons you're just itchin' to ream
> out.

Why do you keep changing your nym Ronnie? Nobody cares enough to killfile
you.

On May 31, 4:13 pm, "Dutch" > wrote:
> "Anybody" > wrote in message
>
> oups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 31, 3:03 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >> On May 31, 1:26 pm, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> >> > "Rudy Canoza" > wrote in message
>
> >> oups.com...
>
> >> > > On May 31, 11:50 am, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >> > >> <dh@.> wrote in
> >> > >> messagenews:kq2u53hktgjepn7dq0sr3edheqhk2esgs5@4ax .com...
> >> > >> > On 30 May 2007 12:41:47 -0700, Goo wrote:
>
> >> > >> >>They have no intrinsic moral meaning until and unless
> >> > >> >>the livestock exist.
>
> >> > >> > If you think you have any clue about any of this Goo,
> >> > >> > then attempt to explain any sort of meaning you're able
> >> > >> > to comprehend and appreciate regarding livestock who
> >> > >> > do exist. Don't even refer to your imaginary nonexistent
> >> > >> > "entities" Goobs, just try to tell us about the real ones.
>
> >> > >> Livestock who exist only need us to pay attention to their welfare.
> >> > >> What
> >> > >> benefit do you imagine your "appreciation" gives them? I'll tell
> >> > >> you,
> >> > >> Zero.
>
> >> > > Exactly right. That was a great comment you made about the welfare
> >> > > in
> >> > > their lives, rather than "their lives", that merits any
> >> > > consideration.
>
> >> > > ****wit is still trying to get people to think the livestock "ought"
> >> > > to exist, for moral reasons, and he just can't do it. He has wasted
> >> > > eight years of his life - but no big loss, because his time is
> >> > > worthless - trying to get people on board with him, and so far no one
> >> > > has. No one ever will.
>
> >> > >> It's your misguided, blundering way to deal with the accusations of
> >> > >> ARAs
> >> > >> who
> >> > >> say that it's cruel to raise livestock.
>
> >> > > Yep. ****wit is too stupid to realize it, but he is essentially
> >> > > acknowledging that "aras" are right. He is so ****ing stupid...
>
> >> > He arrogantly believes that he has discovered a clever way to turn
> >> > their own
> >> > argument back on them.
>
> >> I told him that back in 1999.
>
> >> > He thinks that it's inconsistent to wish for the
> >> > liberation of animals when that liberation would result in the
> >> > elimination
> >> > of the very species of animals you are liberating. He can't understand
> >> > that
> >> > it simply doesn't matter if livestock species exist or not, apart from
> >> > their
> >> > utility, nobody cares.
>
> >> Certainly not the "prevented" livestock themselves.
>
> >> > You're right, by imparting this false importance to
> >> > their existence he is unwittingly supporting the AR position. I
> >> > emphasize
> >> > *unwittingly* because that characterizes him to a tee. He needs to get
> >> > a
> >> > clue in order to be a half-wit.
>
> >> Even as a half-wit, he'd still be ****wit.
>
> > When are you and Douche going into your Net-cop routine Goo?
>
> > Surely there must be some spelling felons you're just itchin' to ream
> > out.
>
> Why do you keep changing your nym Ronnie? Nobody cares enough to killfile
> you.



Flags of convenience Douche.







- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -