denege-Rat wrote:
>>>> Worse: she knows about the "problem", and she point-blank refuses
>>>> to take *any* concrete measure to stop causing it.
>
> Rat:
>
>>> Which, of course, is not true, and which you know is not true
>
>> It is true.
>
> No, it's not.

Yes, it is. Jon is correct in noting that your actions do not match your
rhetoric when it comes to collateral deaths. Not only that, but you
engage in sophistry to evade the issue. Your diet and lifestyle are not
free of animal casualties.

> You and jonnie both try to create a false belief -- that
> unless all negative effects of one's life are eliminated, one has
> done nothing.

You point out the "problem" and offer "solutions" which merely avoid the
problem. The "problem" exists regardless of your diet. You choose to
deny the antecedent. It is your raison d'etre.

> That is false,

No, it's true.

> I understand it is false, and I refuse to
> be sucked into jonnie's vicious and hate-motivated delusions any longer.

It's not vicious, hateful, or delusional to point out instances of
denying the antecedent, immoral or amoral behavior, or hypocrisy.
Veganism at best is hypocritical since it's a false solution to a phony,
contrived problem. At worst, it's a form of intolerant and ignorant
zealotry. Which category is yours?

> You continue purchasing foods produced with chemicals and
>> machines, that are then transported and stored. Deaths occur in your
>> food chain,
>
> Yes, they do, and I know it.

At least you admit your "lifestyle" is responsible for animal
casualties. Your "lifestyle" is no different from any other, except you
don't eat animal parts and you think it makes you more ethical than
those who do. This, of course, gets back to the main issue, namely that
animals still die for your food -- which is why you are no more moral or
ethical than anyone who eats meat.

> It's part of being a human being;

No, it isn't. It's part of nature. Veganism is anti-nature. Veganism is
an attempt to foist the impractical and unnatural on all creatures, not
just mankind.

> the
> same is true of you, jonnie, and every other human on the planet.

Yes, but it only bothers YOU and people like you.

>> you just abstain from animal parts.
>
> Not "just" -- it is one aspect of an ethical philosophy.

There's nothing ethical about it.

> <snip>
>
>>> Sorry, you two -- I'm home and I'm content;
>
>> Face in muff?
>
> Now and again, yes.

Do you use strap ons and other phallic toys?

> I love my wife,

You don't have a wife. You're a woman. Your own state does not respect
such a legal relationship between you and a person of the same sex.

> and I show her that in various
> ways, which is as it should be.

That isn't love.

> (At home, content with my life, and secure in God's love for me, and
> mine for Him.)

He doesn't approve of or respect your homosexual relationship, either.