Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Vegan (alt.food.vegan) This newsgroup exists to share ideas and issues of concern among vegans. We are always happy to share our recipes- perhaps especially with omnivores who are simply curious- or even better, accomodating a vegan guest for a meal! |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
|||
Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?
Hi there,
Having sourced a vegan car wash liquid (Betterware) I can now keep my car resonable clean however I would like to apply a "wax" type product to protect it. Anybody any ideas / recommendations? There's nothing in the Vegan shopper and a good internet search revealed not a lot. Thanks in advance. Cheers, Mark, Hull |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II (Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?)
Mark Evans wrote:
> Hi there, > > Having sourced a vegan car wash liquid (Betterware) I can now keep my > car resonable clean however I would like to apply a "wax" type product > to protect it. Anybody any ideas / recommendations? > > There's nothing in the Vegan shopper and a good internet search revealed > not a lot. Why don't you try to buy a life instead? |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II ( Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?)
"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
hlink.net... > Mark Evans wrote: > > > Hi there, > > > > Having sourced a vegan car wash liquid (Betterware) I can now keep my > > car resonable clean however I would like to apply a "wax" type product > > to protect it. Anybody any ideas / recommendations? > > > > There's nothing in the Vegan shopper and a good internet search revealed > > not a lot. > > Why don't you try to buy a life instead? > come on... the guy didn't ask for shopping suggestions that fall outside the realm of car care products. if you don't have anything useful to contribute to answering his question, why be unkind? |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II ( Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?)
katie > wrote:
> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message > hlink.net... > > Mark Evans wrote: > > > > > Hi there, > > > > > > Having sourced a vegan car wash liquid (Betterware) I can now keep my > > > car resonable clean however I would like to apply a "wax" type product > > > to protect it. Anybody any ideas / recommendations? > > > > > > There's nothing in the Vegan shopper and a good internet search revealed > > > not a lot. > > > > Why don't you try to buy a life instead? > > > > come on... > the guy didn't ask for shopping suggestions that fall outside the realm of > car care products. > if you don't have anything useful to contribute to answering his question, > why be unkind? Cheers for that Kattie - as you say I really don't know what people get out of this kind of reply. And actually Jonofun I do have a life. Sometimes when I go out I drive there and when I do drive I like a nice clean car. I find getting out, meeting people, exploring the world and eating at good vegan restaurants very enjoyable. Maybe you should try leaving your computer alone for a few minutes and instead of spitting venom and snearing at others try to do something out in that place the rest of us call the world. Cheers, Mark PS Jonofun you're on my kill file list so I won't be reading your reply. |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II
Mark Evans wrote:
> katie > wrote: > > >>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message rthlink.net... >> >>>Mark Evans wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Hi there, >>>> >>>>Having sourced a vegan car wash liquid (Betterware) I can now keep my >>>>car resonable clean however I would like to apply a "wax" type product >>>>to protect it. Anybody any ideas / recommendations? >>>> >>>>There's nothing in the Vegan shopper and a good internet search revealed >>>>not a lot. >>> >>>Why don't you try to buy a life instead? >>> >> >>come on... >>the guy didn't ask for shopping suggestions that fall outside the realm of >>car care products. >>if you don't have anything useful to contribute to answering his question, >>why be unkind? > > > Cheers for that Kattie - as you say I really don't know what people get > out of this kind of reply. > > And actually Jonofun I do have a life. Not much of one, if you're fretting and obsessing over whether or not car wax - ****ing CAR WAX, for chrissake! - is "vegan" or not. > Sometimes when I go out I drive > there and when I do drive I like a nice clean car. That's wonderful. > I find getting out, > meeting people, exploring the world and eating at good vegan restaurants > very enjoyable. Maybe you should try leaving your computer alone for a > few minutes and instead of spitting venom and snearing at others try to > do something out in that place the rest of us call the world. "veganism" is an irrational way of thinking. The Search for Micrograms is proof. You are *obsessing* over stupid minutiae. > > PS Jonofun you're on my kill file list so I won't be reading your reply. I wouldn't be so sure of that. |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II ( Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?)
"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message <snip> > "veganism" is an irrational way of thinking. The > Search for Micrograms is proof. You are *obsessing* > over stupid minutiae. <snip> Tell me this, how are they supposed to win? If they don't obssess over micrograms/minutiae, and wear leather shoes, or eat vegetable soup in chicken broth etc. the anti-vegans call them hypocrites, and if they do try to be consistent with their stated beliefs, then the anti-vegans accuse them of having no life. That doesn't seem very fair. This is a vegan newsgroup, so it seems like if there were any place for a vegan to ask about animal free products (whether it be car wax, shoes, or other things) that this would be the place to do it. -Rubystars |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II
Rubystars wrote:
> "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > <snip> > >>"veganism" is an irrational way of thinking. The >>Search for Micrograms is proof. You are *obsessing* >>over stupid minutiae. > > <snip> > > Tell me this, how are they supposed to win? Abandon their belief in a fatally flawed "philosophy", one that is PURELY about adhering to a consumption rule. THAT'S how they win. They can't win if they're going to stand by their WRONG belief that refraining from consuming animal parts is a moral choice. It isn't. > If they don't obssess over > micrograms/minutiae, and wear leather shoes, or eat vegetable soup in > chicken broth etc. the anti-vegans call them hypocrites, and if they do try > to be consistent with their stated beliefs, then the anti-vegans accuse them > of having no life. > > That doesn't seem very fair. That's their problem, for thinking in the first place that a consumption rule will lead to ethical virtue. > > This is a vegan newsgroup, so it seems like if there were any place for a > vegan to ask about animal free products (whether it be car wax, shoes, or > other things) that this would be the place to do it. > > -Rubystars > > |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part deaux ( Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?)
"Rubystars" > wrote in message m... > > This is a vegan newsgroup, so it seems like if there were any place for a > vegan to ask about animal free products (whether it be car wax, shoes, or > other things) that this would be the place to do it. > > -Rubystars > I gotta admit, that's a pretty good point. I suppose the response might be that there is NO place one should ask about what someone else considers minutia, but one person's minutia might be something very important to another. I for one, think it's kinda silly, but my priorities in life don't have to be applied to anyone else. |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II ( Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?)
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 23:38:00 GMT, "Fredrick L. Rice"
> wrote: >Abandon their belief in a fatally flawed "philosophy", >one that is PURELY about adhering to a consumption >rule. THAT'S how they win. They can't win if they're >going to stand by their WRONG belief that refraining >from consuming animal parts is a moral choice. It isn't. This guys hangs out on sci.skeptic, He lives in the desert in a trailer, and comes into town sometimes. *I* know Mitch Kalish, and I thought well of him, until he joined the anti-poetry bridge terrorists. Frederick may not even remember Mitch, but they met once. Frederick is thought to be a bit of a crank. |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II ( Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?)
"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message hlink.net... > Rubystars wrote: > > "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > > <snip> > > > >>"veganism" is an irrational way of thinking. The > >>Search for Micrograms is proof. You are *obsessing* > >>over stupid minutiae. > > > > <snip> > > > > Tell me this, how are they supposed to win? > > Abandon their belief in a fatally flawed "philosophy", > one that is PURELY about adhering to a consumption > rule. THAT'S how they win. They can't win if they're > going to stand by their WRONG belief that refraining > from consuming animal parts is a moral choice. It isn't. Regardless of whether you feel it's a legitimate moral position, they've chosen to abstain from these products as a moral choice. This is a newsgroup dedicated to vegans so it's really silly for you to complain that vegans come here and ask vegan-related questions. > > If they don't obssess over > > micrograms/minutiae, and wear leather shoes, or eat vegetable soup in > > chicken broth etc. the anti-vegans call them hypocrites, and if they do try > > to be consistent with their stated beliefs, then the anti-vegans accuse them > > of having no life. > > > > That doesn't seem very fair. > > That's their problem, for thinking in the first place > that a consumption rule will lead to ethical virtue. Abstaining from animal products is a part of their philosophy, a philosophy this newsgroup is about. It doesn't matter if you think it's the dumbest idea you've ever heard. They have a right to hold it. -Rubystars |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part deaux ( Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?)
"William Hershman" > wrote in message news:fJp7c.55620$_w.884881@attbi_s53... > > "Rubystars" > wrote in message > m... > > > > This is a vegan newsgroup, so it seems like if there were any place for a > > vegan to ask about animal free products (whether it be car wax, shoes, or > > other things) that this would be the place to do it. > > > > -Rubystars > > > > I gotta admit, that's a pretty good point. I suppose the response might be > that there is NO place one should ask about what someone else considers > minutia, but one person's minutia might be something very important to > another. > I for one, think it's kinda silly, but my priorities in life don't have to > be applied to anyone else. Exactly. -Rubystars |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II
Rubystars wrote:
> "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > hlink.net... > >>Rubystars wrote: >> >>>"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message >>><snip> >>> >>>>"veganism" is an irrational way of thinking. The >>>>Search for Micrograms is proof. You are *obsessing* >>>>over stupid minutiae. >>> >>><snip> >>> >>>Tell me this, how are they supposed to win? >> >>Abandon their belief in a fatally flawed "philosophy", >>one that is PURELY about adhering to a consumption >>rule. THAT'S how they win. They can't win if they're >>going to stand by their WRONG belief that refraining >>from consuming animal parts is a moral choice. It isn't. > > > Regardless of whether you feel it's a legitimate moral position, they've > chosen to abstain from these products as a moral choice. This is a newsgroup > dedicated to vegans It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) "vegan" CAR WAX! > so it's really silly for you to complain that vegans > come here and ask vegan-related questions. I'm here, and I'm not leaving. I think "veganism" in general is stupid, and I think the degree of shit-minded obsession that leads some moron to worry himself sick over "vegan" CAR ****ING WAX is evidence of mental illness. > > >>>If they don't obssess over >>>micrograms/minutiae, and wear leather shoes, or eat vegetable soup in >>>chicken broth etc. the anti-vegans call them hypocrites, and if they do try >>>to be consistent with their stated beliefs, then the anti-vegans accuse >>> them of having no life. >>> >>>That doesn't seem very fair. >> >>That's their problem, for thinking in the first place >>that a consumption rule will lead to ethical virtue. > > > Abstaining from animal products is a part of their philosophy, A bad, invalid, bankrupt philosophy. Extending it to ****ING CAR WAX is all the proof you need. > a philosophy > this newsgroup is about. It doesn't matter if you think it's the dumbest > idea you've ever heard. They have a right to hold it. And in no way, nor at any time, did I suggest they didn't. This isn't about their "right" to think weird thoughts; it's about my entirely on-target criticism of the weird, irrational thoughts themselves. |
|
|||
|
|||
hmmm...
"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message link.net... > Rubystars wrote: > > "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > > hlink.net... > > > >>Rubystars wrote: > >> > >>>"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > >>><snip> > >>> > >>>>"veganism" is an irrational way of thinking. The > >>>>Search for Micrograms is proof. You are *obsessing* > >>>>over stupid minutiae. > >>> > >>><snip> > >>> > >>>Tell me this, how are they supposed to win? > >> > >>Abandon their belief in a fatally flawed "philosophy", > >>one that is PURELY about adhering to a consumption > >>rule. THAT'S how they win. They can't win if they're > >>going to stand by their WRONG belief that refraining > >>from consuming animal parts is a moral choice. It isn't. > > > > > > Regardless of whether you feel it's a legitimate moral position, they've > > chosen to abstain from these products as a moral choice. This is a newsgroup > > dedicated to vegans > > It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. > This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) > "vegan" CAR WAX! don't you think it's kinda funny that you're reaming this guy out for asking about a non-food vegan item on a vegan food site (presumably the problem being that he's off-topic) when you're debating vegan philosophy on a vegan food site? > so it's really silly for you to complain that vegans > > come here and ask vegan-related questions. > > I'm here, and I'm not leaving. I think "veganism" in > general is stupid, and I think the degree of > shit-minded obsession that leads some moron to worry > himself sick over "vegan" CAR ****ING WAX is evidence > of mental illness. > > > > > > >>>If they don't obssess over > >>>micrograms/minutiae, and wear leather shoes, or eat vegetable soup in > >>>chicken broth etc. the anti-vegans call them hypocrites, and if they do try > >>>to be consistent with their stated beliefs, then the anti-vegans accuse > >>> them of having no life. > >>> > >>>That doesn't seem very fair. > >> > >>That's their problem, for thinking in the first place > >>that a consumption rule will lead to ethical virtue. > > > > > > Abstaining from animal products is a part of their philosophy, > > A bad, invalid, bankrupt philosophy. Extending it to > ****ING CAR WAX is all the proof you need. > > > a philosophy > > this newsgroup is about. It doesn't matter if you think it's the dumbest > > idea you've ever heard. They have a right to hold it. > > And in no way, nor at any time, did I suggest they > didn't. This isn't about their "right" to think weird > thoughts; it's about my entirely on-target criticism of > the weird, irrational thoughts themselves. > |
|
|||
|
|||
hmmm...
katie wrote:
> "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > link.net... > >>Rubystars wrote: >> >>>>>Tell me this, how are they supposed to win? >>>> >>>>Abandon their belief in a fatally flawed "philosophy", >>>>one that is PURELY about adhering to a consumption >>>>rule. THAT'S how they win. They can't win if they're >>>>going to stand by their WRONG belief that refraining >>> >>>>from consuming animal parts is a moral choice. It isn't. >>> >>> >>>Regardless of whether you feel it's a legitimate moral position, they've >>>chosen to abstain from these products as a moral choice. This is a >>>newsgroup dedicated to vegans >> >>It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. >>This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) >>"vegan" CAR WAX! > > > don't you think it's kinda funny that you're reaming this guy out for asking > about a non-food vegan item on a vegan food site (presumably the problem > being that he's off-topic) when you're debating vegan philosophy on a vegan > food site? No, dummy. The problem is not one of being off-topic, although he is. The problem is "veganism" in general, with its attendant Irrational Search for Micrograms, and the problem is compounded by this asshole obsessing over ****ing CAR WAX! "veganism" is a thoroughly bogus "philosophy"; the word "philosophy" must be put in quotes (of derision) when using it to describe "veganism", as it isn't a philosophy at all. It's a pseudo-philosophy. The idea that avoiding the consumption of Animal Parts makes one "more ethical" is patently absurd. That this ****wit extends it all the way to ****ING CAR WAX! illustrates the depths of depravity to which people will sink in their search for easy solutions. |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II ( Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?)
"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message hlink.net>...
> Rubystars wrote: > > "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > > hlink.net... > > > >>Rubystars wrote: > >> > >>>"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > >>><snip> > >>> > >>>>"veganism" is an irrational way of thinking. The > >>>>Search for Micrograms is proof. You are *obsessing* > >>>>over stupid minutiae. > >>> > >>><snip> > >>> > >>>Tell me this, how are they supposed to win? > >> > >>Abandon their belief in a fatally flawed "philosophy", > >>one that is PURELY about adhering to a consumption > >>rule. THAT'S how they win. They can't win if they're > >>going to stand by their WRONG belief that refraining > >>from consuming animal parts is a moral choice. It isn't. > > > > > > Regardless of whether you feel it's a legitimate moral position, they've > > chosen to abstain from these products as a moral choice. This is a newsgroup > > dedicated to vegans > > It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. > This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) > "vegan" CAR WAX! > > > so it's really silly for you to complain that vegans > > come here and ask vegan-related questions. > > I'm here, and I'm not leaving. I think "veganism" in > general is stupid, and I think the degree of > shit-minded obsession that leads some moron to worry > himself sick over "vegan" CAR ****ING WAX is evidence > of mental illness. > > > > > > >>>If they don't obssess over > >>>micrograms/minutiae, and wear leather shoes, or eat vegetable soup in > >>>chicken broth etc. the anti-vegans call them hypocrites, and if they do try > >>>to be consistent with their stated beliefs, then the anti-vegans accuse > >>> them of having no life. > >>> > >>>That doesn't seem very fair. > >> > >>That's their problem, for thinking in the first place > >>that a consumption rule will lead to ethical virtue. > > > > > > Abstaining from animal products is a part of their philosophy, > > A bad, invalid, bankrupt philosophy. Extending it to > ****ING CAR WAX is all the proof you need. > > > a philosophy > > this newsgroup is about. It doesn't matter if you think it's the dumbest > > idea you've ever heard. They have a right to hold it. > > And in no way, nor at any time, did I suggest they > didn't. This isn't about their "right" to think weird > thoughts; it's about my entirely on-target criticism of > the weird, irrational thoughts themselves. Is that idiot Ball now posing as Freddy Rice? |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II ( Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?)
|
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II
Ron wrote:
> "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message hlink.net>... > >>Rubystars wrote: >> >>>"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message arthlink.net... >>> >>> >>>>Rubystars wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message >>>>><snip> >>>>> >>>>>>"veganism" is an irrational way of thinking. The >>>>>>Search for Micrograms is proof. You are *obsessing* >>>>>>over stupid minutiae. >>>>> >>>>><snip> >>>>> >>>>>Tell me this, how are they supposed to win? >>>> >>>>Abandon their belief in a fatally flawed "philosophy", >>>>one that is PURELY about adhering to a consumption >>>>rule. THAT'S how they win. They can't win if they're >>>>going to stand by their WRONG belief that refraining >>> >>>>from consuming animal parts is a moral choice. It isn't. >>> >>> >>>Regardless of whether you feel it's a legitimate moral position, they've >>>chosen to abstain from these products as a moral choice. This is a newsgroup >>>dedicated to vegans >> >>It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. >> This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) >>"vegan" CAR WAX! >> >> >>>so it's really silly for you to complain that vegans >>>come here and ask vegan-related questions. >> >>I'm here, and I'm not leaving. I think "veganism" in >>general is stupid, and I think the degree of >>shit-minded obsession that leads some moron to worry >>himself sick over "vegan" CAR ****ING WAX is evidence >>of mental illness. >> >> >>> >>>>>If they don't obssess over >>>>>micrograms/minutiae, and wear leather shoes, or eat vegetable soup in >>>>>chicken broth etc. the anti-vegans call them hypocrites, and if they do try >>>>>to be consistent with their stated beliefs, then the anti-vegans accuse >>>>>them of having no life. >>>>> >>>>>That doesn't seem very fair. >>>> >>>>That's their problem, for thinking in the first place >>>>that a consumption rule will lead to ethical virtue. >>> >>> >>>Abstaining from animal products is a part of their philosophy, >> >>A bad, invalid, bankrupt philosophy. Extending it to >>****ING CAR WAX is all the proof you need. >> >> >>>a philosophy >>>this newsgroup is about. It doesn't matter if you think it's the dumbest >>>idea you've ever heard. They have a right to hold it. >> >>And in no way, nor at any time, did I suggest they >>didn't. This isn't about their "right" to think weird >>thoughts; it's about my entirely on-target criticism of >>the weird, irrational thoughts themselves. > > > > > Is that idiot Ball now posing as Freddy Rice? It wouldn't occur to you to address the issue of the Irrational Search for Micrograms itself, would it, Ronnie? |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II
Mark Evans wrote:
<...> > Cheers for that Kattie - as you say I really don't know what people get > out of this kind of reply. > > And actually Jonofun I do have a life. Sometimes when I go out I drive > there and when I do drive I like a nice clean car. Tell us, vegan, how many animals have you run over? <...> > PS Jonofun you're on my kill file list so I won't be reading your reply. Like a silly little bitch to hit someone, then run and hide. Why can't you be man enough to hang around long enough to take what you dish out? |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II
Fredrick L. Rice wrote:
<...> > It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. This asswipe > started asking about (jesus christ!) "vegan" CAR WAX! I have to agree with you. This ranks as one of the silliest requests yet at AFV. >> so it's really silly for you to complain that vegans >> come here and ask vegan-related questions. > > I'm here, and I'm not leaving. I think "veganism" in general is stupid, > and I think the degree of shit-minded obsession that leads some moron to > worry himself sick over "vegan" CAR ****ING WAX is evidence of mental > illness. The funny part is his accusing ANYONE ELSE of not having a life. <...> |
|
|||
|
|||
hmmm...
katie wrote:
Thank you for not top-posting. <...> > don't you think it's kinda funny that you're reaming this guy out for asking > about a non-food vegan item on a vegan food site (presumably the problem > being that he's off-topic) when you're debating vegan philosophy on a vegan > food site? No, but it's hilarious that someone cares so much about finding a vegan car wax. <...> |
|
|||
|
|||
hmmm...
"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message hlink.net... > katie wrote: > > > "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > > link.net... > > > >>Rubystars wrote: > >> > > >>>>>Tell me this, how are they supposed to win? > >>>> > >>>>Abandon their belief in a fatally flawed "philosophy", > >>>>one that is PURELY about adhering to a consumption > >>>>rule. THAT'S how they win. They can't win if they're > >>>>going to stand by their WRONG belief that refraining > >>> > >>>>from consuming animal parts is a moral choice. It isn't. > >>> > >>> > >>>Regardless of whether you feel it's a legitimate moral position, they've > >>>chosen to abstain from these products as a moral choice. This is a > >>>newsgroup dedicated to vegans > >> > >>It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. > >>This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) > >>"vegan" CAR WAX! > > > > > > don't you think it's kinda funny that you're reaming this guy out for asking > > about a non-food vegan item on a vegan food site (presumably the problem > > being that he's off-topic) when you're debating vegan philosophy on a vegan > > food site? > > No, dummy. The problem is not one of being off-topic, pardon me. i assumed that the problem was that he was off-topic, considering your reply: "It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) "vegan" CAR WAX!" you can see why the emphasis on 'food' and 'car wax' would lead me to this conclusion. i hardly think that this justifies calling me a 'dummy.' there is no need to name-call. you people need to learn to get along with others. > although he is. The problem is "veganism" in general, > with its attendant Irrational Search for Micrograms, > and the problem is compounded by this asshole obsessing > over ****ing CAR WAX! > > "veganism" is a thoroughly bogus "philosophy"; the word > "philosophy" must be put in quotes (of derision) when > using it to describe "veganism", as it isn't a > philosophy at all. It's a pseudo-philosophy. The idea > that avoiding the consumption of Animal Parts makes one > "more ethical" is patently absurd. That this ****wit > extends it all the way to ****ING CAR WAX! illustrates > the depths of depravity to which people will sink in > their search for easy solutions. |
|
|||
|
|||
hmmm...
katie wrote:
> "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > hlink.net... > >>katie wrote: >> >> >>>>It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. >>>>This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) >>>>"vegan" CAR WAX! >>> >>> >>>don't you think it's kinda funny that you're reaming this guy out for asking >>>about a non-food vegan item on a vegan food site (presumably the problem >>>being that he's off-topic) when you're debating vegan philosophy on a vegan >>>food site? >> >>No, dummy. The problem is not one of being off-topic, > > > pardon me. i assumed that the problem was that he was off-topic, > considering your reply: > "It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. > This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) > "vegan" CAR WAX!" The problem is that he is agonizing over a great big moral NOTHING. > you can see why the emphasis on 'food' and 'car wax' would lead me to this > conclusion. i hardly think that this justifies calling me a 'dummy.' there > is no need to name-call. you people need to learn to get along with others. > > >>although he is. The problem is "veganism" in general, >>with its attendant Irrational Search for Micrograms, >>and the problem is compounded by this asshole obsessing >>over ****ing CAR WAX! >> >>"veganism" is a thoroughly bogus "philosophy"; the word >>"philosophy" must be put in quotes (of derision) when >>using it to describe "veganism", as it isn't a >>philosophy at all. It's a pseudo-philosophy. The idea >>that avoiding the consumption of Animal Parts makes one >>"more ethical" is patently absurd. That this ****wit >>extends it all the way to ****ING CAR WAX! illustrates >>the depths of depravity to which people will sink in >>their search for easy solutions. > > > > |
|
|||
|
|||
hmmm...
"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message hlink.net... > katie wrote: > > > "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > > hlink.net... > > > >>katie wrote: > >> > >> > > >>>>It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. > >>>>This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) > >>>>"vegan" CAR WAX! > >>> > >>> > >>>don't you think it's kinda funny that you're reaming this guy out for asking > >>>about a non-food vegan item on a vegan food site (presumably the problem > >>>being that he's off-topic) when you're debating vegan philosophy on a vegan > >>>food site? > >> > >>No, dummy. The problem is not one of being off-topic, > > > > > > pardon me. i assumed that the problem was that he was off-topic, > > considering your reply: > > "It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. > > This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) > > "vegan" CAR WAX!" > > The problem is that he is agonizing over a great big > moral NOTHING. what do you care? lots of people agonize over what are moral 'nothings' in the eyes of others, not just vegans. personally, i think it's pretty odd that strict jewish folks have whole different sides of the kitchen and whole different sets of dishes even, for keeping dairy and meat separate. but hey, they believe in it, so what if it makes no sense to me? that may be a religious thing, but it is a moral issue to them, just like vegansim is a moral issue to this guy. if he wants to spend countless hours lamenting over finding just the right car wax to make his beloved car pretty, then hey, that's his thing. why waste so much energy giving a damn about what he does? > > > you can see why the emphasis on 'food' and 'car wax' would lead me to this > > conclusion. i hardly think that this justifies calling me a 'dummy.' there > > is no need to name-call. you people need to learn to get along with others. > > > > > >>although he is. The problem is "veganism" in general, > >>with its attendant Irrational Search for Micrograms, > >>and the problem is compounded by this asshole obsessing > >>over ****ing CAR WAX! > >> > >>"veganism" is a thoroughly bogus "philosophy"; the word > >>"philosophy" must be put in quotes (of derision) when > >>using it to describe "veganism", as it isn't a > >>philosophy at all. It's a pseudo-philosophy. The idea > >>that avoiding the consumption of Animal Parts makes one > >>"more ethical" is patently absurd. That this ****wit > >>extends it all the way to ****ING CAR WAX! illustrates > >>the depths of depravity to which people will sink in > >>their search for easy solutions. > > > > > > > > > |
|
|||
|
|||
hmmm...
katie wrote:
> "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > hlink.net... > >>katie wrote: >> >> >>>"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message arthlink.net... >>> >>> >>>>katie wrote: >>>> >>>> >> >>>>>>It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. >>>>>>This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) >>>>>>"vegan" CAR WAX! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>don't you think it's kinda funny that you're reaming this guy out for > > asking > >>>>>about a non-food vegan item on a vegan food site (presumably the > > problem > >>>>>being that he's off-topic) when you're debating vegan philosophy on a > > vegan > >>>>>food site? >>>> >>>>No, dummy. The problem is not one of being off-topic, >>> >>> >>>pardon me. i assumed that the problem was that he was off-topic, >>>considering your reply: >>>"It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. >>> This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) >>>"vegan" CAR WAX!" >> >>The problem is that he is agonizing over a great big >>moral NOTHING. > > > what do you care? What do YOU care that I care? > lots of people agonize over what are moral 'nothings' in > the eyes of others, not just vegans. I criticize them, too. > personally, i think it's pretty odd > that strict jewish folks have whole different sides of the kitchen and whole > different sets of dishes even, for keeping dairy and meat separate. but > hey, they believe in it, so what if it makes no sense to me? that may be a > religious thing, but it is a moral issue to them, No, it is purely a religious issue. > just like vegansim is a > moral issue to this guy. if he wants to spend countless hours lamenting > over finding just the right car wax to make his beloved car pretty, then > hey, that's his thing. It's my thing to rip him for it, and to use it as a vehicle for pointing out the overall stupidity of "veganism". > why waste so much energy giving a damn about what he > does? Not much energy at all. |
|
|||
|
|||
hmmm...
"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message hlink.net... > katie wrote: > > > "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > > hlink.net... > > > >>katie wrote: > >> > >> > >>>"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > arthlink.net... > >>> > >>> > >>>>katie wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >>>>>>It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. > >>>>>>This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) > >>>>>>"vegan" CAR WAX! > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>don't you think it's kinda funny that you're reaming this guy out for > > > > asking > > > >>>>>about a non-food vegan item on a vegan food site (presumably the > > > > problem > > > >>>>>being that he's off-topic) when you're debating vegan philosophy on a > > > > vegan > > > >>>>>food site? > >>>> > >>>>No, dummy. The problem is not one of being off-topic, > >>> > >>> > >>>pardon me. i assumed that the problem was that he was off-topic, > >>>considering your reply: > >>>"It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. > >>> This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) > >>>"vegan" CAR WAX!" > >> > >>The problem is that he is agonizing over a great big > >>moral NOTHING. > > > > > > what do you care? > > What do YOU care that I care? i guess i just care because being unkind to others isn't cool, especially when they are just asking for product advice, rather than a lifestyle critique. > > > lots of people agonize over what are moral 'nothings' in > > the eyes of others, not just vegans. > > I criticize them, too. > > > personally, i think it's pretty odd > > that strict jewish folks have whole different sides of the kitchen and whole > > different sets of dishes even, for keeping dairy and meat separate. but > > hey, they believe in it, so what if it makes no sense to me? that may be a > > religious thing, but it is a moral issue to them, > > No, it is purely a religious issue. > > > just like vegansim is a > > moral issue to this guy. if he wants to spend countless hours lamenting > > over finding just the right car wax to make his beloved car pretty, then > > hey, that's his thing. > > It's my thing to rip him for it, and to use it as a > vehicle for pointing out the overall stupidity of > "veganism". > > > why waste so much energy giving a damn about what he > > does? > > Not much energy at all. > |
|
|||
|
|||
The Irrational Search for Micrograms of Animal Parts, part II ( Any vegan car waxes / polishes in UK?)
"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message thlink.net>...
> Ron wrote: > > > "Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message hlink.net>... > > > >>Rubystars wrote: > >> > >>>"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > arthlink.net... > >>> > >>> > >>>>Rubystars wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>"Fredrick L. Rice" > wrote in message > >>>>><snip> > >>>>> > >>>>>>"veganism" is an irrational way of thinking. The > >>>>>>Search for Micrograms is proof. You are *obsessing* > >>>>>>over stupid minutiae. > >>>>> > >>>>><snip> > >>>>> > >>>>>Tell me this, how are they supposed to win? > >>>> > >>>>Abandon their belief in a fatally flawed "philosophy", > >>>>one that is PURELY about adhering to a consumption > >>>>rule. THAT'S how they win. They can't win if they're > >>>>going to stand by their WRONG belief that refraining > > >>>>from consuming animal parts is a moral choice. It isn't. > >>> > >>> > >>>Regardless of whether you feel it's a legitimate moral position, they've > >>>chosen to abstain from these products as a moral choice. This is a newsgroup > >>>dedicated to vegans > >> > >>It's a newsgroup ostensibly dedicated to "vegan" FOOD. > >> This asswipe started asking about (jesus christ!) > >>"vegan" CAR WAX! > >> > >> > >>>so it's really silly for you to complain that vegans > >>>come here and ask vegan-related questions. > >> > >>I'm here, and I'm not leaving. I think "veganism" in > >>general is stupid, and I think the degree of > >>shit-minded obsession that leads some moron to worry > >>himself sick over "vegan" CAR ****ING WAX is evidence > >>of mental illness. > >> > >> > >>> > >>>>>If they don't obssess over > >>>>>micrograms/minutiae, and wear leather shoes, or eat vegetable soup in > >>>>>chicken broth etc. the anti-vegans call them hypocrites, and if they do try > >>>>>to be consistent with their stated beliefs, then the anti-vegans accuse > >>>>>them of having no life. > >>>>> > >>>>>That doesn't seem very fair. > >>>> > >>>>That's their problem, for thinking in the first place > >>>>that a consumption rule will lead to ethical virtue. > >>> > >>> > >>>Abstaining from animal products is a part of their philosophy, > >> > >>A bad, invalid, bankrupt philosophy. Extending it to > >>****ING CAR WAX is all the proof you need. > >> > >> > >>>a philosophy > >>>this newsgroup is about. It doesn't matter if you think it's the dumbest > >>>idea you've ever heard. They have a right to hold it. > >> > >>And in no way, nor at any time, did I suggest they > >>didn't. This isn't about their "right" to think weird > >>thoughts; it's about my entirely on-target criticism of > >>the weird, irrational thoughts themselves. > > > > > > > > > > Is that idiot Ball now posing as Freddy Rice? > > It wouldn't occur to you to address the issue of the > Irrational Search for Micrograms itself, would it, Ronnie? Wouldn't I be "*obsessing* over stupid minutiae" if I did that? |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|