Goo argues for the misnomer "animal rights"
 

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Goo boasted:

>I've kicked your ass the hardest of all.

You've just sung the elimination song stronger
and longer than anyone else Goo, that's all:

"ONLY deliberate human killing deserves any moral
consideration." - Goo

"We're ONLY talking about deliberate human killing" - Goo

"Fact: IF it is wrong to kill animals deliberately for food, then
having deliberately caused them to live in the first place does
not mitigate the wrong in any way." - Goo

""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of
their deaths" - Goo

"the nutritionally unnecessary choice deliberately to kill an animal
ALWAYS causes a moral harm greater in magnitude than . . . the
moral "benefit" realized by the animal in existing at all" - Goo

"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude
than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo

"The meaningless fact-lette that farm animals "get to
experience life" deserves no consideration when asking
whether or not it is moral to kill them. Zero." - Goo

"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing
of the animals erases all of it." - Goo

"Humans could change it. They could change it by ending it." - Goo

"you MUST believe that it makes moral sense not to raise the
animals as the only way to prevent the harm that results from
killing them." - Goo

"There is no "selfishness" involved in wanting farm animals not to
exist as a step towards creating a more just world." - Goo