These two like to tag team their harrassment.

It takes two to get up to no good, quite often, so you can see why.

However, verbal intercourse is a rather intimate affair when done
properly.

So it would not surprise me to find they share even more intimacies.

Leaving out "significant others" for decency's sake, it would seem
they share a very passionate hatred for raw veagns, and are agrreed
that intolerance is a sure bet anywhere.

I just wish they'd stop trying to sound older than they are, but it
may be too late. Spiritual rebirth is a notion i can't wait for them
to scoff at. The Human brain matures at about 33 years of age. but,
that's another arguement....

On 19 Apr 2004 04:24:42 -0700, (soapless) wrote:

>These two like to tag team their harrassment.
>
>It takes two to get up to no good,

Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to fewer animal
deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they don't really care about
human influence on animals. They only care about promoting
veg*nism regardless of its impact on animals. What causes
great mental anguish to the veg*ns is that they don't want to
admit even to themselves that they could be mistaken, again
regardless--**completely regardless!!**--of their impact on animals.

wrote in message >. ..
> On 19 Apr 2004 04:24:42 -0700, (soapless) wrote:
>
> >These two like to tag team their harrassment.
> >
> >It takes two to get up to no good,
>
> Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to fewer animal
> deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they don't really care about
> human influence on animals. They only care about promoting
> veg*nism regardless of its impact on animals. What causes
> great mental anguish to the veg*ns is that they don't want to
> admit even to themselves that they could be mistaken, again
> regardless--**completely regardless!!**--of their impact on animals.



Please quote where etter "points out how veg*ns could contribute to
fewer animal deaths."

All he does is babble.

nope -they name-call, a sure sign of unmanageable anger.

Frugality, not any diet terminology is what saves lives.

On 20 Apr 2004 12:04:05 -0700, (soapless) wrote:

>nope -they name-call, a sure sign of unmanageable anger.

We can agree that the name calling isn't likely to help anything,
and might possibly make things worse. But maybe it doesn't make
any difference how he points things out. From my experience in
these ngs veg*ns will always try to oppose the suggestion that
people consider any other type of diet, even when it involves
fewer animal deaths than veg*nism.

>Frugality, not any diet terminology is what saves lives.

· From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
draining of fields, one meal of soy or rice based product is
likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of meals
derived from grass raised cattle. Grass raised cattle products
contribute to less wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
better lives for cattle than soy or rice products. ·

On 20 Apr 2004 11:19:54 -0700, (Ron) wrote:

wrote in message >. ..
>> On 19 Apr 2004 04:24:42 -0700, (soapless) wrote:
>>
>> >These two like to tag team their harrassment.
>> >
>> >It takes two to get up to no good,
>>
>> Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to fewer animal
>> deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they don't really care about
>> human influence on animals. They only care about promoting
>> veg*nism regardless of its impact on animals. What causes
>> great mental anguish to the veg*ns is that they don't want to
>> admit even to themselves that they could be mistaken, again
>> regardless--**completely regardless!!**--of their impact on animals.
>
>
>
> Please quote where etter "points out how veg*ns could contribute to
>fewer animal deaths."
>
> All he does is babble.

He does have a good point, but the presentation triggers
resentment. Regardless of how it's pointed out though, I've
come to believe veg*ns will always try to promote the idea
that veg*nism is the most ethical option even when it causes
more deaths than eating meat. That fact causes a strong feeling
of disgust in me, and it would appear that it does so in Etter as
well. That being the case, it doesn't matter how he points it out,
does it? If not, I guess he may as well go ahead and vent if
that's how he wants to do it.

That is precisely why i avoid those very "foods", not mentioning the
protein overdose of "wrong strands " surf{protein folding}.

let's address coffee and petroleum, you seem to know logistics.

Personally, it was the disposable cups, not the having to tip the
waitress, that turned me off. My van burned $75 cdn a day to be self
employed as a tradesman. Now, i'll never drive again due to "my"
pollution concerns. just so you know my "qualifications" to speak on
the matter.

Also, if it is a seed, bean, nut, sprout or any whole or potentially
whole lifeform it is killing to eat it. This is not the case with my
diet - but for the insenitivities of the farmer that "produces" them.
A garden of tomates is a very symbiotic relationship if one craps
there, as the seeds need that partial digestion of protein coat to
sprout.

Also, when i walk, i check more for ants than cars.

Thou shalt not kill. Never mind if the cows step on ants, we have to
learn to sit on our hands and myob not just byob.

wrote in message >. ..
> On 20 Apr 2004 11:19:54 -0700, (Ron) wrote:
>
> wrote in message >. ..
> >> On 19 Apr 2004 04:24:42 -0700, (soapless) wrote:
> >>
> >> >These two like to tag team their harrassment.
> >> >
> >> >It takes two to get up to no good,
> >>
> >> Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to fewer animal
> >> deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they don't really care about
> >> human influence on animals. They only care about promoting
> >> veg*nism regardless of its impact on animals. What causes
> >> great mental anguish to the veg*ns is that they don't want to
> >> admit even to themselves that they could be mistaken, again
> >> regardless--**completely regardless!!**--of their impact on animals.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please quote where etter "points out how veg*ns could contribute to
> >fewer animal deaths."
> >
> > All he does is babble.
>
> He does have a good point, but the presentation triggers
> resentment. Regardless of how it's pointed out though, I've
> come to believe veg*ns will always try to promote the idea
> that veg*nism is the most ethical option even when it causes
> more deaths than eating meat. That fact causes a strong feeling
> of disgust in me, and it would appear that it does so in Etter as
> well. That being the case, it doesn't matter how he points it out,
> does it? If not, I guess he may as well go ahead and vent if
> that's how he wants to do it.


Quit obfuscating and show the *QUOTE*!

Jeez. Are you ~both~ retarded?

"soapless" > wrote in message
om...
> These two like to tag team their harrassment.
>
> It takes two to get up to no good, quite often, so you can see why.
>
> However, verbal intercourse is a rather intimate affair when done
> properly.
==================
And it'
s obvious you've never had any, of either kind....


>
> So it would not surprise me to find they share even more intimacies.
>
> Leaving out "significant others" for decency's sake, it would seem
> they share a very passionate hatred for raw veagns, and are agrreed
> that intolerance is a sure bet anywhere.
================
Really? I suggest you read vegans with a little more comprehension. They,
and you, are the ones spewing the hate. It's a part of your vegan
religion...



>
> I just wish they'd stop trying to sound older than they are, but it
> may be too late. Spiritual rebirth is a notion i can't wait for them
> to scoff at. The Human brain matures at about 33 years of age. but,
> that's another arguement....
======================
Then maybe there is hope for you, someday, eh stupid?

"Ron" > wrote in message
om...
> wrote in message
>. ..
> > On 19 Apr 2004 04:24:42 -0700, (soapless) wrote:
> >
> > >These two like to tag team their harrassment.
> > >
> > >It takes two to get up to no good,
> >
> > Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to fewer animal
> > deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they don't really care about
> > human influence on animals. They only care about promoting
> > veg*nism regardless of its impact on animals. What causes
> > great mental anguish to the veg*ns is that they don't want to
> > admit even to themselves that they could be mistaken, again
> > regardless--**completely regardless!!**--of their impact on animals.
>
>
>
> Please quote where etter "points out how veg*ns could contribute to
> fewer animal deaths."
================
Any number of posts, fool. try reading for comprehension, instead of
hate...


>
> All he does is babble.
=================
To your ignorant mindless stupidity, maybe. Sane people know that you are a
desperate killer, looking for absolution...

"soapless" > wrote in message
om...
> nope -they name-call, a sure sign of unmanageable anger.
==================
Nope. A sure sign that you have nothing to refute what we say.

That's why you have to snip out everything somebody posts before you add
your bit of stupidity.



>
> Frugality, not any diet terminology is what saves lives.
==================
Refute what I say. Or, defend the vegan simple rule for simple minds with
real data.

You can't do either, killer.

On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 20:54:44 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:

>
>"Ron" > wrote in message
. com...
>> wrote in message
> ...
>> > On 19 Apr 2004 04:24:42 -0700, (soapless) wrote:
>> >
>> > >These two like to tag team their harrassment.
>> > >
>> > >It takes two to get up to no good,
>> >
>> > Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to fewer animal
>> > deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they don't really care about
>> > human influence on animals. They only care about promoting
>> > veg*nism regardless of its impact on animals. What causes
>> > great mental anguish to the veg*ns is that they don't want to
>> > admit even to themselves that they could be mistaken, again
>> > regardless--**completely regardless!!**--of their impact on animals.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please quote where etter "points out how veg*ns could contribute to
>> fewer animal deaths."
>================
>Any number of posts, fool. try reading for comprehension,

That would involve considering how he contributes to animal deaths
like everybody else, and may be far beyond what he's willing to attempt.

>instead of
>hate...

It appears that his hatred is stronger than yours.

>> All he does is babble.
>=================
>To your ignorant mindless stupidity, maybe. Sane people know that you are a
>desperate killer, looking for absolution...

In order to look for absolution, wouldn't he first have to admit to his contribution
to animal deaths? I believe he's more likely in a state of chronic denial, and will
probably never be able to rise above it.

On 21 Apr 2004 11:18:49 -0700, (soapless) wrote:

>Also, if it is a seed, bean, nut, sprout or any whole or potentially
>whole lifeform it is killing to eat it.

I seriously doubt that vegetation has feelings or awareness,
and ***definately!!!*** hope that they don't. If they do, the
suffering caused by humans and other animals is absolutely
incredible. Just mowing the lawn would be a horrible act.

>This is not the case with my
>diet - but for the insenitivities of the farmer that "produces" them.
>A garden of tomates is a very symbiotic relationship if one craps
>there, as the seeds need that partial digestion of protein coat to
>sprout.

If plants have feelings then you contribute to incredible
horrors regardless of which types you consume.

>Also, when i walk, i check more for ants than cars.
>
>Thou shalt not kill.

Deuteronomy 12
15 Nevertheless, you may slaughter your animals in any of your
towns and eat as much of the meat as you want, as if it were
gazelle or deer, according to the blessing the LORD your
God gives you. Both the ceremonially unclean and the clean
may eat it.

Deuteronomy 14
4 These are the animals you may eat: the ox, the sheep, the
goat,
5 the deer, the gazelle, the roe deer, the wild goat, the ibex,
the antelope and the mountain sheep.
6 You may eat any animal that has a split hoof divided in two and
that chews the cud.
7 However, of those that chew the cud or that have a split hoof
completely divided you may not eat the camel, the rabbit or the
coney. Although they chew the cud, they do not have a split
hoof; they are ceremonially unclean for you.
8 The pig is also unclean; although it has a split hoof, it does not
chew the cud. You are not to eat their meat or touch their
carcasses.
9 Of all the creatures living in the water, you may eat any that has
fins and scales.
10 But anything that does not have fins and scales you may not eat;
for you it is unclean.
11 You may eat any clean bird.
12 But these you may not eat: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture,
13 the red kite, the black kite, any kind of falcon,
14 any kind of raven,
15 the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk,
16 the little owl, the great owl, the white owl,
17 the desert owl, the osprey, the cormorant,
18 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.
19 All flying insects that swarm are unclean to you; do not eat them.
20 But any winged creature that is clean you may eat.
21 Do not eat anything you find already dead. You may give it to an
alien living in any of your towns, and he may eat it, or you may
sell it to a foreigner. But you are a people holy to the LORD your
God. Do not cook a young goat in its mother's milk.

1 Kings 8
5 and King Solomon and the entire assembly of Israel that had
gathered about him were before the ark, sacrificing so many sheep
and cattle that they could not be recorded or counted.
[...]
63 Solomon offered a sacrifice of fellowship offerings to the LORD:
twenty-two thousand cattle and a hundred and twenty thousand
sheep and goats. So the king and all the Israelites dedicated the
temple of the LORD.

Mark 7
18 "Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing
that enters a man from the outside can make him `unclean'?
19 For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and
then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods
"clean.")

>Never mind if the cows step on ants,

The point still remains that some types of meat involve fewer
deaths than some types of veggies.

>we have to
>learn to sit on our hands and myob not just byob.

look, if you want to get into it..

a] this is an archive, not a newsgroup.So, why record copies of the
same message cut up to bits multiple times? Newsgroups are flushed
regularly, and that is why they copy posts- because there is no
backup. This archive is full of pointless copying.

b] there were fifteen commandments, renedering the fifth [ shalt not
kill] more central, however, one of the missing five states, "thou
shalt not constuct any graven image", which would rule out the bible
itself or any record keeping, in fact.

C] I thought i need at least one rule, so i went with not killing.

sorry if this freaks you out or offends you.

and jesus did not declare all food clean by saying that, he merely
stated that eating any food isn't what kills you , it's the digestion
process.

"it's not wht enters a man that defiles him, it's what goeth out of
him."

thought it isn't often read properly it was a reference to colon
cancer, he was a healer.

"soapless" > wrote in message
om...
> look, if you want to get into it..
>
> a] this is an archive, not a newsgroup.So, why record copies of the
> same message cut up to bits multiple times? Newsgroups are flushed
> regularly, and that is why they copy posts- because there is no
> backup. This archive is full of pointless copying.
>
> b] there were fifteen commandments, renedering the fifth [ shalt not
> kill] more central, however, one of the missing five states, "thou
> shalt not constuct any graven image", which would rule out the bible
> itself or any record keeping, in fact.
>
> C] I thought i need at least one rule, so i went with not killing.
>
> sorry if this freaks you out or offends you.
=================
Are you too stupid to know how to post to a news-group, or are you just that
much of a troll, little one?

Sorry if your ignorance offends you...

.....you doubting that plants are sentient is just as viable as plants
doubting your sentience.

Also, i'vegone to great lengths to describer how seeds need planting
in a symbiotic manner, without this torment you so gleefully refer to-
why not post about violence in a proper forum?

follow the thread if you do not know who "you" is, i repeat this is an
archive- not erased -stop filling it with copies of "aguers" who have
yet to discern the logic of the included or excluded middle.

brainless wrote:
> and jesus did not declare all food clean by saying that, he merely
> stated that eating any food isn't what kills you , it's the digestion
> process.
>
> "it's not wht enters a man that defiles him, it's what goeth out of
> him."
>
> thought it isn't often read properly it was a reference to colon
> cancer, he was a healer.

BWAHAHAHA! Read it in its context again, nitwit, and consider it in light of
passages like those elsewhere in the Bible about the tongue: how it's used to
flatter God and condemn one another.

thoughtless wrote:
> look, if you want to get into it..
>
> a] this is an archive, not a newsgroup.

It is a newsgroup. ALT.FOOD.VEGAN.

> So, why record copies of the
> same message cut up to bits multiple times?

So those of us who don't read by thread can understand the context.

> Newsgroups are flushed
> regularly, and that is why they copy posts- because there is no
> backup. This archive is full of pointless copying.

It's not pointless if we know to whom you're replying.

> b] there were fifteen commandments,

Ipse dixit. You better go read up on it.

<...>

On 22 Apr 2004 13:37:34 -0700, (soapless) wrote:

>look, if you want to get into it..
>
>a] this is an archive, not a newsgroup.

It's a news group.

>So, why record copies of the
>same message cut up to bits multiple times? Newsgroups are flushed
>regularly, and that is why they copy posts- because there is no
>backup. This archive is full of pointless copying.

It has a point. Maybe some day you'll figure it out, but if you can't
see it right away you probably never will. My impression is that you
can see it, and snip everything because it makes it easier for you to
avoid things you're afraid to deal with.

>b] there were fifteen commandments, renedering the fifth [ shalt not
>kill]

Leviticus 20
1 The LORD said to Moses,
2 "Say to the Israelites: `Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel who
gives[1] any of his children to Molech must be put to death. The people
of the community are to stone him.
[...]
9 "`If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death. He has
cursed his father or his mother, and his blood will be on his own head.
10 "`If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his
neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.
11 "`If a man sleeps with his father's wife, he has dishonored his father. Both
the man and the woman must be put to death; their blood will be on their
own heads.
12 "`If a man sleeps with his daughter-in-law, both of them must be put to
death. What they have done is a perversion; their blood will be on their
own heads.
13 "`If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have
done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be
on their own heads.
14 "`If a man marries both a woman and her mother, it is wicked. Both he and
they must be burned in the fire, so that no wickedness will be among you.
15 "`If a man has sexual relations with an animal, he must be put to death, and
you must kill the animal.
16 "`If a woman approaches an animal to have sexual relations with it, kill both
the woman and the animal. They must be put to death; their blood will be on
their own heads.

Numbers 15
32 While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was found gathering wood on
the Sabbath day.
33 Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and
the whole assembly,
34 and they kept him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done
to him.
35 Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man must die. The whole assembly
must stone him outside the camp."
36 So the assembly took him outside the camp and stoned him to death, as the
LORD commanded Moses.

>more central, however, one of the missing five states, "thou
>shalt not constuct any graven image",

Where does it say that?

>which would rule out the bible
>itself or any record keeping, in fact.
>
>C] I thought i need at least one rule, so i went with not killing.
>
>sorry if this freaks you out or offends you.

It does neither. But I am aware that you contribute to most of the
same deaths everyone else does.

On 22 Apr 2004 14:52:26 -0700, (soapless) wrote:

>....you doubting that plants are sentient is just as viable as plants
>doubting your sentience.

I doubt it.

>Also, i'vegone to great lengths to describer how seeds need planting
>in a symbiotic manner, without this torment you so gleefully refer to-
>why not post about violence in a proper forum?

You brag about stomping on ants here.

>follow the thread if you do not know who "you" is, i repeat this is an
>archive- not erased -stop filling it with copies of "aguers" who have
>yet to discern the logic of the included or excluded middle.

> draining of fields, one meal of soy or rice based product is
> likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of meals

so eat organic fruit and nuts

John

"John Coleman" > wrote in message
news:8ydkc.827$7S2.694@newsfe1-win...
> > draining of fields, one meal of soy or rice based product is
> > likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of meals
>
> so eat organic fruit and nuts
==================
Where are you importing them in from? I just love looking at all the vegan
recipies that are for exotic dishes that call for foods from around the
world. Shipping all that supposed 'cruelty-free' stuff at the expense of
untold millions of other animals, just to keep from eating 1 cow. What a
hoot!


>
> John
>
>

Ah, Rick Etter....

What a stupid, fanatical piece of shit.

I once came to this NG as an omni, simply looking for advice and
various opinions on veganism. This stupid ****face immediately
started in by calling me a murderer, etc. Hell of a welcome for
someone who was very confused and just looking for a little advice.

Hopefully he'll soon choke on his own vomit.

> Where are you importing them in from?

Nearly all food in the UK is imported as we have nothing much left here in
terms of farming. We don't have enough land area to support everyone with
animal farming either, so we even import meat. We could support everyone if
we cultivated more plant foods however, and ate them instead.

> recipies that are for exotic dishes that call for foods from around the
> world. Shipping all that supposed 'cruelty-free' stuff at the expense of
> untold millions of other animals, just to keep from eating 1 cow. What a
> hoot!

Not a hoot, but innevitable given the economic situation. It is possible to
gather some wild nuts and fruits here, but only during a few weeks of the
year. Some vegans BTW do try and live almost all off local produce.

BTW your hypothesis is completely unsupportable by facts or logic. It is as
about as uninformed as pointing to your eye teeth and pretending they are
fangs.

John C

On 29 Apr 2004 19:57:15 -0700, (Kelly) wrote:

>Ah, Rick Etter....
>
>What a stupid, fanatical piece of shit.
>
>I once came to this NG as an omni, simply looking for advice and
>various opinions on veganism. This stupid ****face immediately
>started in by calling me a murderer, etc.

We all contribute to the death of animals. Some of us are more
willing to accept it than others.

>Hell of a welcome for
>someone who was very confused and just looking for a little advice.

· From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
draining of fields, one meal of soy or rice based product is
likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of meals
derived from grass raised cattle. Grass raised cattle products
contribute to less wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
better lives for cattle than soy or rice products. ·

>Hopefully he'll soon choke on his own vomit.

Did he wish anything so nasty on you?

"John Coleman" > wrote in message
...
> > Where are you importing them in from?
>
> Nearly all food in the UK is imported
====================
So, it's hardly anything near 'cruelty-free' is it?

as we have nothing much left here in
> terms of farming. We don't have enough land area to support everyone with
> animal farming either, so we even import meat.
=======================
The point is we aren't talking about 'everyone'. we are talking about a
small group of kooks that *claim* to care and to do 'all they can' to
eliminate/reduce animal death and suffering in their lives. It's a ly.
They do no such thing. There are enough areas for you to grow/raise much of
want you need, but you(vegans) are too engrossed in your conveninece and
consumer driven lifestyle. Animals are 2nd, they come in even behind your
entertainment. vegans talk about unnecessary death and suffering, but
ultimately that's all they do, talk. And all the talk focuses only on what
they think others are doing, with no thought to their own contributions.
All they do is follow their simple rule for their simple minds, 'eat no
meat.'



We could support everyone if
> we cultivated more plant foods however, and ate them instead.
>
> > recipies that are for exotic dishes that call for foods from around the
> > world. Shipping all that supposed 'cruelty-free' stuff at the expense
of
> > untold millions of other animals, just to keep from eating 1 cow. What
a
> > hoot!
>
> Not a hoot, but innevitable given the economic situation.
=-================
No, it's not. It's still a choice made for convenince and taste. There is
no 'need' for a vegan to engage in all the exotic imported foods, their do
it anyway, since they figure that not eating meat automatically causes no
animals to die.


It is possible to
> gather some wild nuts and fruits here, but only during a few weeks of the
> year. Some vegans BTW do try and live almost all off local produce.
>
> BTW your hypothesis is completely unsupportable by facts or logic. It is
as
> about as uninformed as pointing to your eye teeth and pretending they are
> fangs.
==================
Nope. I have far more to support me that you have. You've never posted
anything that comes close to proving that a vegan diet causes fewer deaths
than any meat-included diet. Give it a try though.

>
> John C
>
>

"Kelly" > wrote in message
om...
> Ah, Rick Etter....
>
> What a stupid, fanatical piece of shit.
=================
if that's the case, refute anything I've said, fool. can't do it, can you?

>
> I once came to this NG as an omni, simply looking for advice and
> various opinions on veganism. This stupid ****face immediately
> started in by calling me a murderer, etc.
=======================
Now you're lying. just like every other vegan here. I've never called you
a murderer. That term is used by vegans. That's another of their lys,
because you cannot murder an animal.


Hell of a welcome for
> someone who was very confused and just looking for a little advice.
===============
ou're still and idiot it seems...


>
> Hopefully he'll soon choke on his own vomit.
================
Does mommy know you're not in school and using profane language, little boy?

"rick etter" > wrote in message
. net...
>
> "Kelly" > wrote in message
> om...
> > Ah, Rick Etter....
> >
> > What a stupid, fanatical piece of shit.
> =================
> if that's the case, refute anything I've said, fool. can't do it,
can you?

An evasive diversion. The issue is what a "stupid, fanatical piece of
shit" you are, and you immediately attempt to divert the discussion to
something else. Next you'll whine that he won't answer any of your
questions - questions that serve no purpose other than drag the
discussion into a meaningless quagmire. Boring and predictable.

> > I once came to this NG as an omni, simply looking for advice and
> > various opinions on veganism. This stupid ****face immediately
> > started in by calling me a murderer, etc.
> =======================
> Now you're lying. just like every other vegan here. I've never
called you
> a murderer.

You call people "killer", it's the same thing.

> That term is used by vegans. That's another of their lys,
> because you cannot murder an animal.

First of all, "lys" should be spelled "lies". It's one of those
confusing words that changes spelling for different tenses: lie,
lying, lied, lies. Please get it right.

Second, you're playing a stupid game of symantics. Murder and killing
are the same things whether it's a human or another animal (that's
right, humans are animals). The point is they both mean imposing death
on another being. Call it what you want, the meaning is still DEATH.

> Hell of a welcome for
> > someone who was very confused and just looking for a little
advice.
> ===============
> ou're still and idiot it seems...

Did you ever pass the second grade or are you mentally incapacitated?
Oh, sorry I used a big word. Substitute "stupid" in place of "mentally
incapacitated" Yes, that makes things simpler for you.

> > Hopefully he'll soon choke on his own vomit.
> ================
> Does mommy know you're not in school and using profane language,
little boy?

Let me guess. You were a bully in school and now you're a troll.

"C. James Strutz" > wrote in message
...
>
> "rick etter" > wrote in message
> . net...
> >
> > "Kelly" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > > Ah, Rick Etter....
> > >
> > > What a stupid, fanatical piece of shit.
> > =================
> > if that's the case, refute anything I've said, fool. can't do it,
> can you?
>
> An evasive diversion. The issue is what a "stupid, fanatical piece of
> shit" you are, and you immediately attempt to divert the discussion to
> something else. Next you'll whine that he won't answer any of your
> questions - questions that serve no purpose other than drag the
> discussion into a meaningless quagmire. Boring and predictable.
====================
Hey, he'll be just like you then, uh?


>
> > > I once came to this NG as an omni, simply looking for advice and
> > > various opinions on veganism. This stupid ****face immediately
> > > started in by calling me a murderer, etc.
> > =======================
> > Now you're lying. just like every other vegan here. I've never
> called you
> > a murderer.
>
> You call people "killer", it's the same thing.
===================
No, it is not! Look up the term before you make yourself look anymore
foolish. As if that were possible.


>
> > That term is used by vegans. That's another of their lys,
> > because you cannot murder an animal.
>
> First of all, "lys" should be spelled "lies". It's one of those
> confusing words that changes spelling for different tenses: lie,
> lying, lied, lies. Please get it right.
====================
It is right fool. I spell it that way as a special tribute to one of your
side most ignorant posters, Pearl. She used to use 'Lys" as her screen
name. Quite appropriate, considering the crop she posts...


>
> Second, you're playing a stupid game of symantics. Murder and killing
> are the same things whether it's a human or another animal (that's
> right, humans are animals).
======================
No, it is not the same, stupid. Maybe 5th grade will teach you that next
year.



The point is they both mean imposing death
> on another being. Call it what you want, the meaning is still DEATH.
>
> > Hell of a welcome for
> > > someone who was very confused and just looking for a little
> advice.
> > ===============
> > ou're still and idiot it seems...
>
> Did you ever pass the second grade or are you mentally incapacitated?
> Oh, sorry I used a big word. Substitute "stupid" in place of "mentally
> incapacitated" Yes, that makes things simpler for you.
>
> > > Hopefully he'll soon choke on his own vomit.
> > ================
> > Does mommy know you're not in school and using profane language,
> little boy?
>
> Let me guess. You were a bully in school and now you're a troll.
==================
Ah yes, yet another word you have no idea of the meaning. Thanks for
proving, yet again, you stupidity, and lack of caring for animals.

>
>

> We all contribute to the death of animals. Some of us are more
> willing to accept it than others.

What's your point? I agree with you. I'm saying that I was looking
for advice, and he immediately started attacking me with his
fanaticism, calling me a "killer", and a few other names in just about
every sentence. For all he knew, I could have come to agree with him.
But no, he just saw someone who was confused and therefore an easy
target to pick on. He's an asshole who doesn't know how to hold a
civilized conversation. He couldn't do it to save his own life.

But I went vegan because I DO hate animals. I want the evil beasts to
die. I can't help it; I'm bloodthirsty. At least I'm consistent,
right?

"Kelly" > wrote in message
om...
> > We all contribute to the death of animals. Some of us are more
> > willing to accept it than others.
>
> What's your point? I agree with you. I'm saying that I was looking
> for advice, and he immediately started attacking me with his
> fanaticism, calling me a "killer", and a few other names in just about
> every sentence.
=================
Really? Where were my profanities? I guess you can't stand the heat, you
you run....



For all he knew, I could have come to agree with him.
> But no, he just saw someone who was confused and therefore an easy
> target to pick on. He's an asshole who doesn't know how to hold a
> civilized conversation. He couldn't do it to save his own life.
======================
ROTFLMAO This from the one using profane language. You truely are a gem!

When did I suddenly become male?

And yes, Dick, you are completely mentally deranged and no one with at
least an ounce of intelligence will refute that.

Oh, and I don't kill animals with my diet. I ony eat rocks that I
gather from the alley behind my building.

"Kelly" > wrote in message
om...
> When did I suddenly become male?
>
> And yes, Dick, you are completely mentally deranged and no one with at
> least an ounce of intelligence will refute that.
>
> Oh, and I don't kill animals with my diet. I ony eat rocks that I
> gather from the alley behind my building.

I suppose it could be argued (yes, I'm being silly now) that if you picked
up a rock that you could be removing a shelter from animals that had taken
refuge underneath it, exposing them to the elements and predation.

-Rubystars

"Rubystars" > wrote in message m>...
> "Kelly" > wrote in message
> om...
> > When did I suddenly become male?
> >
> > And yes, Dick, you are completely mentally deranged and no one with at
> > least an ounce of intelligence will refute that.
> >
> > Oh, and I don't kill animals with my diet. I ony eat rocks that I
> > gather from the alley behind my building.
>
> I suppose it could be argued (yes, I'm being silly now) that if you picked
> up a rock that you could be removing a shelter from animals that had taken
> refuge underneath it, exposing them to the elements and predation.
>
> -Rubystars

Oh great! And here I was feeling so comfortably smug! Thanks a lot,
Rubystars!!!! WhyIoughtta...... (hee hee......just kidding)

> Oh, and I don't kill animals with my diet. I ony eat rocks that I
> gather from the alley behind my building.

<G> what a murderer of rocks! You must try the breatharian diet instead
Kelly!

On 30 Apr 2004 14:17:02 -0700, (Kelly) wrote:

>> We all contribute to the death of animals. Some of us are more
>> willing to accept it than others.
>
>What's your point? I agree with you. I'm saying that I was looking
>for advice, and he immediately started attacking me with his
>fanaticism, calling me a "killer", and a few other names in just about
>every sentence. For all he knew, I could have come to agree with him.

Well, that's what he does.

> But no, he just saw someone who was confused

What were you confused about?

>and therefore an easy
>target to pick on.

He does it to people who don't think they're confused too.

>He's an asshole who doesn't know how to hold a
>civilized conversation. He couldn't do it to save his own life.

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 11:18:57 -0400, "C. James Strutz" > wrote:

>
>"rick etter" > wrote in message
.net...
>>
>> "Kelly" > wrote in message
>> om...
>> > Ah, Rick Etter....
>> >
>> > What a stupid, fanatical piece of shit.
>> =================
>> if that's the case, refute anything I've said, fool. can't do it,
>can you?
>
>An evasive diversion. The issue is what a "stupid, fanatical piece of
>shit" you are, and you immediately attempt to divert the discussion to
>something else. Next you'll whine that he won't answer any of your
>questions - questions that serve no purpose other than drag the
>discussion into a meaningless quagmire. Boring and predictable.
>
>> > I once came to this NG as an omni, simply looking for advice and
>> > various opinions on veganism. This stupid ****face immediately
>> > started in by calling me a murderer, etc.
>> =======================
>> Now you're lying. just like every other vegan here. I've never
>called you
>> a murderer.
>
>You call people "killer", it's the same thing.
>
>> That term is used by vegans. That's another of their lys,
>> because you cannot murder an animal.
>
>First of all, "lys" should be spelled "lies". It's one of those
>confusing words that changes spelling for different tenses: lie,
>lying, lied, lies. Please get it right.
>
>Second, you're playing a stupid game of symantics. Murder and killing
>are the same things whether it's a human or another animal (that's
>right, humans are animals).

I'd like to see you provide some evidence that there is no distinction.
Probably not many--if any--people are just going to take your word for it.

>The point is they both mean imposing death
>on another being. Call it what you want, the meaning is still DEATH.

Good point there. The same is true to feed veg*ns, as he points
out, and to house them, and provide them with paper, and wood, and
roads, and electricity.....