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 |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
Common Man wrote: >>All we're demanding is that people keep their snouts >>out of our lives, and other places where their snouts >>don't belong. > > > That pretty well sums it up. Being vegan as a personal lifestyle is > fine with me if that's what you want. But when it becomes a cause > that people wish to impose on me, then that's a different story. Which, is pretty much how I live. However, wtf are you doing in a vegan food newgroup then? -- Blue |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"Common Man" <not.public@> wrote in message ... > On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 19:27:07 GMT, "William Hershman" > > wrote: > > > > >"Common Man" <not.public@> wrote in message > ws.com... > >> On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 10:22:14 GMT, "William Hershman" > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > > >> >"Common Man" <not.public@> wrote in message > >> ws.com... > >> >> On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 00:41:32 GMT, usual suspect > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >http://www.veganessentials.com/catal...s-jerquee-.htm > >> >> > >> >> Don't many if not most vegans detest the idea of eating meat? If so, > >> >> then wouldn't they find such a product offensive? > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> >I can't speak for all, but I don't detest the idea of eating meat, I just > >> >don't eat meat. > >> > >> There's nothing wrong with that in itself. But many seem to detest > >> the idea of eating meat, yet eat vegan foods processed to look and > >> even taste like meat. Seems to be hypocritical to me. > > > >It certainly is. Why spend time looking for hypocrisy in others, when you > >could probably find your own? > > Because I'm not demanding that everyone eats meat. The ARAs on the > other hand, are demanding that everyone doesn't eat meat. There lies > the difference. > > No one has ever demanded that of me. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message ink.net... > William Hershman wrote: > > > "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message > > ink.net... > > > >>William Hershman wrote: > >> > >> > >>>"Common Man" <not.public@> wrote in message > news.com... > >>> > >>> > >>>>On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 00:41:32 GMT, usual suspect > > >>>>wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>http://www.veganessentials.com/catal...s-jerquee-.htm > >>>> > >>>>Don't many if not most vegans detest the idea of eating meat? If so, > >>>>then wouldn't they find such a product offensive? > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>Hello, Bill. > >> > >> > >>>I can't speak for all, but I don't detest the idea of eating meat, I > > > > just > > > >>>don't eat meat. > >> > >>That makes you (mostly) a vegetarian, not a "vegan". > > > > > > If I need to be labeled, then I'm really (mostly) a dickhead > > You are probably the ONLY person I've ever encountered > in a.f.v. who ISN'T a dickhead, Bill. Gee whiz, Jon...thanks. I'm blushing. > > > but I'm not > > concerned about what people call me. I guess I'm not really a vegan because > > I only eat this way,,,I don't really concern myself with animal parts in my > > clothes and such. I just prefer what many would call a vegan diet. > > Do you worry about whether or not sugar was refined > using bone char? > > What about the black olives? That's a very revealing test. No to both. I'm not searching for minutia. But if I find chunks of beef in what I thought to be vegetable soup, I'd certainly pick them out before I eat it. > > > Unfortunately, "vegetarian" to most people means that cheese is OK, and I > > don't like to eat cheese, so I tell people that my diet is vegan...which is > > probably technically incorrect, but they usually know what I mean. > > > > > |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message ink.net... > William Hershman wrote: > > > "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message > > ink.net... > > > >>Common Man wrote: > >> > >> > >>>I'd like to get one or two of those older 'R' series > >> > >>BMWs, but business will need to pick up for me first, > >>as much so I can buy a house with a bigger garage as so > >>I can buy the bikes themselves. > >> > >>For now, I content myself with my one 1992 K75-S. > >> > >> > >>> > > Jon, I always pictured you as more of a 1200 guy > > Oh, man, I would *love* a K1200. I've lusted over them > at the BMW dealer where I bought mine, but I just can't > afford one, and as the father of a young (3-1/2) boy, I > am beginning to think I shouldn't ride a motorcycle at all. > > > but now that I think about > > it, that would probably be too much for your skinny lil' butt anyway. > > Although the 1200s look huge (to me, anyway), I've sat > on them, and it didn't feel like something I couldn't > handle. I'm rather short, though - 5'6" - and on my > K75, I can't get both feet flat on the ground at a > stop. I usually just get one foot solidly on the > ground and leave the other on the peg. > > Do you ride one? > No. I'd love to, but it's that same kid thing...I have three now, 13, 11 and 8. Also Pittsburgh is not the greatest two-wheeler friendly city. My brother had a Harley Davidson Sportster back when I was a teenager, and he let me ride it a few times, but I think that I'm way better off not riding. I tend to go to extremes, and I don't think I would make tasty roadkill. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
Common Man wrote: > On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 16:25:26 -0400, BlueHeron > > wrote: > > >> >>Common Man wrote: >> >> >> >>>>All we're demanding is that people keep their snouts >>>>out of our lives, and other places where their snouts >>>>don't belong. >>> >>> >>>That pretty well sums it up. Being vegan as a personal lifestyle is >>>fine with me if that's what you want. But when it becomes a cause >>>that people wish to impose on me, then that's a different story. >> >>Which, is pretty much how I live. However, wtf are you doing in a vegan >>food newgroup then? > > > For the purpose of discussion. Be pretty boring if everyone in a > given newsgroup all agreed with each other on every issue. > > Example: > > BlueHeron: "I'm a vegan" > > Then everyone replies: "Me too!" > > Boy, wouldn't that be exciting?! Except that this is a newsgroup to discuss food, as in, recipes and preperation. Specifically, vegan food. If I wanted discussion, I would look at one of the ara groups. As it is, I am simply looking for recipes, in a recipe themed groups (at least, it used to be 1+ years ago!). Cheers, -- Blue |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"nemo" > wrote in message ... > > rick etter > wrote in message > nk.net... > > > > "Common Man" <not.public@> wrote in message > > s.com... > > > On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 00:41:32 GMT, usual suspect > > > > wrote: > > > > > > >rick etter wrote: > > > >>><...> > > > >>> > > > >>>>>I've never tried the plain flavor. I usually drink vanilla and > > sometimes > > > >>>>>chocolate. > > > >>>> > > > >>>>plain flavor is neutral tasting-not as yummy as the other flavors- > > > >>>>personally I like variety-my wife is a purist-natural less > > > >> > > > >> ingredients... > > > >> > > > >>>I must respectfully ask, What's "natural" about fake milk made of > > boiled > > > >>>soybeans, sea salt, sweetener, stabilizers, and some added vitamins? > > > >>>================= > > > >> > > > >> LOL Great question, Usual.... > > > >> > > > >> Ah, the ignorance of vegans knows no bounds, does it? > > > > > > > >It's pretty funny sometimes. We have a "hippie" health food store here > > that > > > >sells the following product (link below) up front at the cash register. > I > > > >noticed the packaging and started laughing. The cashier wanted to know > > what was > > > >so funny, so I pointed to the part about it being "all natural." I > asked > > her > > > >what was so natural about making soybeans taste just like real jerky. > She > > wasn't > > > >amused. Those people never are. > > > > > > > >http://www.veganessentials.com/catal...s-jerquee-.htm > > > > > > Don't many if not most vegans detest the idea of eating meat? If so, > > > then wouldn't they find such a product offensive? > > > ============================ > > No, they inaccurately believe that animals only die when real meat is > eaten. > > Have you not seen the number of meat substitutes that are on the market > that > > veg*ns still love to eat? So obviously for all of them it's not the taste > > or texture of meat that they dislike. The real hoot about all that is > that > > they then claim the fake meats are an 'all natural' food stuff. As if you > > could really find any 'naturally' occuring tofu paste or tvp just lying in > > the fields. The best part of all this is that if you really get down to > it, > > no mono-cultured crop is 'natural' at all. No where have I ever seen > > fields of cabbages spontaneously appear. Their whole belief system is > based > > on stupidity and ignorance. > > > Fan queue. And slagging off a whole huge group of good, well-meaning people > based on your misunderstanding of one word isn't? ======================== Intentions mean nothing, fool. their actions are what counts. Their actions kill animals on a massive level, and they care nothing about it, as long as they can say they follow their simple rulwe for their simple minds. There is no misunderstanding of the word natural, except by those that continue to claim that a highly processed product that is nothing like its original state is 'natural'. Is that your claim too, killer? > > |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"William Hershman" > wrote in message news:rapwc.5064$HG.3690@attbi_s53... > > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > ... > > William Hershman wrote: > > > > >> > > >>>http://www.veganessentials.com/catal...s-jerquee-.htm > > >> > > >>Don't many if not most vegans detest the idea of eating meat? If so, > > >>then wouldn't they find such a product offensive? > > >> > > > > > > I can't speak for all, but I don't detest the idea of eating meat, I > just > > > don't eat meat. > > > > You know that's atypical of the activists who've proliferated in this > group in > > the past. Why do you not eat meat? > > > > > > I don't like it. I feel better when I don't eat it. I still use leather. > I can put meat around my belly, just not in it. > ====================== Then the statement did not apply to you as you are not vegan, eh? > |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"Common Man" <not.public@> wrote in message ... > On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:35:03 GMT, "William Hershman" > > wrote: > > > > >"Common Man" <not.public@> wrote in message > .. . > >> On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 19:27:07 GMT, "William Hershman" > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > > >> >"Common Man" <not.public@> wrote in message > >> ws.com... > >> >> On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 10:22:14 GMT, "William Hershman" > >> >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> >"Common Man" <not.public@> wrote in message > >> >> ws.com... > >> >> >> On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 00:41:32 GMT, usual suspect > > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >http://www.veganessentials.com/catal...s-jerquee-.htm > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Don't many if not most vegans detest the idea of eating meat? If > >so, > >> >> >> then wouldn't they find such a product offensive? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> >I can't speak for all, but I don't detest the idea of eating meat, I > >just > >> >> >don't eat meat. > >> >> > >> >> There's nothing wrong with that in itself. But many seem to detest > >> >> the idea of eating meat, yet eat vegan foods processed to look and > >> >> even taste like meat. Seems to be hypocritical to me. > >> > > >> >It certainly is. Why spend time looking for hypocrisy in others, when > >you > >> >could probably find your own? > >> > >> Because I'm not demanding that everyone eats meat. The ARAs on the > >> other hand, are demanding that everyone doesn't eat meat. There lies > >> the difference. > >> > >> > > > >No one has ever demanded that of me. > > > "Extremists within the environmental and animal rights movements have > committed literally thousands of violent criminal acts in recent > decades - arguably more than those from any other radical sector, left > or right. > > Although these extremists have yet to kill anyone in America, they > have carried out arsons, firebombings, assaults, and attacks on > animal-based businesses and laboratories. > > This February, an FBI official testified to Congress that what he > characterized as the leading eco-terrorist groups - the Animal > Liberation Front (ALF) and the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) - had > committed more than 600 criminal acts since 1996 that resulted in a > minimum of $43 million in damage. > > What follows is a selection of 1984-2002 incidents, drawn from ALF/ELF > communiqués, media reports, law enforcement officials and publications > of the movement." > http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intel...cle.jsp?sid=29 > > I would argue that acts of violence to achieve one's goals is in fact > "making demands". I would argue that if someone told me they were going to kick the shit out of you unless I ate a hamburger, I'd still go for the pasta. I didn't check out the link. I'm too busy plotting my next act of violence. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"Common Man" <not.public@> wrote in message ... > On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 16:25:26 -0400, BlueHeron > > wrote: > > > > > > >Common Man wrote: > > > > > >>>All we're demanding is that people keep their snouts > >>>out of our lives, and other places where their snouts > >>>don't belong. > >> > >> > >> That pretty well sums it up. Being vegan as a personal lifestyle is > >> fine with me if that's what you want. But when it becomes a cause > >> that people wish to impose on me, then that's a different story. > > > >Which, is pretty much how I live. However, wtf are you doing in a vegan > >food newgroup then? > > For the purpose of discussion. Be pretty boring if everyone in a > given newsgroup all agreed with each other on every issue. > > Example: > > BlueHeron: "I'm a vegan" > > Then everyone replies: "Me too!" > > Boy, wouldn't that be exciting?! YES!!! That would be very exciting!!! |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"rick etter" > wrote in message hlink.net... > > "William Hershman" > wrote in message > news:rapwc.5064$HG.3690@attbi_s53... > > > > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > > ... > > > William Hershman wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > >>>http://www.veganessentials.com/catal...s-jerquee-.htm > > > >> > > > >>Don't many if not most vegans detest the idea of eating meat? If so, > > > >>then wouldn't they find such a product offensive? > > > >> > > > > > > > > I can't speak for all, but I don't detest the idea of eating meat, I > > just > > > > don't eat meat. > > > > > > You know that's atypical of the activists who've proliferated in this > > group in > > > the past. Why do you not eat meat? > > > > > > > > > > > I don't like it. I feel better when I don't eat it. I still use leather. > > I can put meat around my belly, just not in it. > > ====================== > Then the statement did not apply to you as you are not vegan, eh? > I guess not. NEVER MIND. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"BlueHeron" > wrote in message m... > > > Common Man wrote: > > > On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 16:25:26 -0400, BlueHeron > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > >>Common Man wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>>All we're demanding is that people keep their snouts > >>>>out of our lives, and other places where their snouts > >>>>don't belong. > >>> > >>> > >>>That pretty well sums it up. Being vegan as a personal lifestyle is > >>>fine with me if that's what you want. But when it becomes a cause > >>>that people wish to impose on me, then that's a different story. > >> > >>Which, is pretty much how I live. However, wtf are you doing in a vegan > >>food newgroup then? > > > > > > For the purpose of discussion. Be pretty boring if everyone in a > > given newsgroup all agreed with each other on every issue. > > > > Example: > > > > BlueHeron: "I'm a vegan" > > > > Then everyone replies: "Me too!" > > > > Boy, wouldn't that be exciting?! > > Except that this is a newsgroup to discuss food, as in, recipes and > preperation. Specifically, vegan food. > > If I wanted discussion, I would look at one of the ara groups. > > As it is, I am simply looking for recipes, in a recipe themed groups (at > least, it used to be 1+ years ago!). ===================== At the creation of this group, discussion of the other issues were also invited. > > Cheers, > > -- Blue |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
----- Original Message ----- From: "usual suspect" > Newsgroups: alt.food.vegan Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 7:38 PM Subject: Why I like soy milk > BlueHeron wrote: > >>>>>>> I must respectfully ask, What's "natural" about fake milk made of > >>>>>>> boiled > >>>>>>> soybeans, sea salt, sweetener, stabilizers, and some added vitamins? > >>>>>>> ================= > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> LOL Great question, Usual.... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Ah, the ignorance of vegans knows no bounds, does it? > >>> > >>> Which is pretty funny, considering that at least in Canada, "natural" > >>> flavour is simply soybean and water, which, imho is perfectly natural. > >> > >> What's natural about hydrolyzing soy beans to make them taste like > >> "natural flavour"? Soy beans are pretty bland on their own which is > >> why most people are put off by them. It's all the fidgeting around > >> with them in kitchens and labs that makes them taste "meaty." > > .... i think you guys got your wires crossed. in this post, the guy is talking about natural flavour soy milk. not natural flavour made from soybeans, for soy sauce, hsp's or any of that. > > > SoNice Natural is GMO free soybeens with water. > > Is that all? That's not what the label says: > Filtered Water, Organic Whole Soybeans, Chicory Syrup, Tricalcium > Phosphate, Sea Salt, Carrageenan, Magnesium Phosphate, Ascorbic Acid, > Niacin, Zinc Gluconate, Pantothenate, Riboflavin, Vitamin B6, Vitamin A, > Thiamine, Folacin, Vitamin D2, Vitamin B12. > > Carrageenan is also known as Irish moss. It's a sea weed used as a stabilizer. I > read the labels on milk cartons at the store while ago. The ingredient list was > much shorter: milk, vitamin A, vitamin D. No stabilizers like carrageenan. No > tricalcium phosphate or magnesium phosphate. No chicory syrup. No sea salt. > > BTW, the ingredients are listed on your SoNice. And at this convenient web page: > http://www.sonice-soyganic.com/Engli..._original.html this guy is talking about the natural flavour, not the original flavour which has the long ingredient list you posted. so you picked a different flavour from the one he was talking about to illustrate a point, but again, you're talking about something that he's not talking about. if you go to this convenient web page, http://www.sonice.ca/English/beverages_natural.html you'll see that the label does say "Ingredients: Filtered Water, Organic Whole Soybeans." and that is all. it's fine to point out that the other flavours have lots of stuff added, but to suggest that this guy is off base when he says that his soy milk is only soybeans and water is misleading, because he consumes and is talking about the natural flavour, and the website clearly states that the ingredients of that flavour are as he stated. > .... > > Consider the following web page. > http://www.milk.mb.ca/Nutritin/myth/myths2.htm just as a note, that page is run off the manitoba milk producer's web site. .... |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
Jonathan Ball > wrote in message link.net>...
> Jonathan Ball wrote: > > >>> IOW, they're also out of touch with reality (which is one reason why > >>> I suspect AR/veganism are symptoms of deeper mental illness; perhaps > >>> it will one day be used diagnostically as a syndrome capturing those > >>> who are anti-social, out of touch with reality, and who have a > >>> peculiar eating disorder -- the latter being orthorexia). > > > > > > Do a Google search on "orthorexia", sometimes referred to as "orthorexia > > nervosa" by the medical doctor (and admitted former orthorexic) who > > coined the term, Steven Bratman. There are over 3000 references to it. > > The term is not yet a DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of > > Mental Disorders) accepted diagnosis, but I predict it will become one. > > Bratman's own page on the disorder is http://www.orthorexia.com. > > There's a wealth of information about it. > > I looked up some more information on Steven Bratman, > and while he still seems to have a lot of off-putting > "alternative" aspects to him, he nonetheless went to a > good accredited medical school (University of > California at Davis) and did his internship at a good > psychiatric clinic (Menninger). His credentials are in > order. Unlike yours. .. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"rick etter" > wrote in message link.net>...
> "BlueHeron" > wrote in message > m... > > > > > > Common Man wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 16:25:26 -0400, BlueHeron > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > >>Common Man wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>>>All we're demanding is that people keep their snouts > > >>>>out of our lives, and other places where their snouts > > >>>>don't belong. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>That pretty well sums it up. Being vegan as a personal lifestyle is > > >>>fine with me if that's what you want. But when it becomes a cause > > >>>that people wish to impose on me, then that's a different story. > > >> > > >>Which, is pretty much how I live. However, wtf are you doing in a vegan > > >>food newgroup then? > > > > > > > > > For the purpose of discussion. Be pretty boring if everyone in a > > > given newsgroup all agreed with each other on every issue. > > > > > > Example: > > > > > > BlueHeron: "I'm a vegan" > > > > > > Then everyone replies: "Me too!" > > > > > > Boy, wouldn't that be exciting?! > > > > Except that this is a newsgroup to discuss food, as in, recipes and > > preperation. Specifically, vegan food. > > > > If I wanted discussion, I would look at one of the ara groups. > > > > As it is, I am simply looking for recipes, in a recipe themed groups (at > > least, it used to be 1+ years ago!). > ===================== > At the creation of this group, discussion of the other issues were also > invited. > that would explain why losers like you and Bawl are objects of discussion. > > > > > Cheers, > > > > -- Blue |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
katie wrote: <snip> > >>http://www.sonice-soyganic.com/Engli..._original.html > > > this guy is talking about the natural flavour, not the original flavour > which has the long ingredient list you posted. so you picked a different > flavour from the one he was talking about to illustrate a point, but again, > you're talking about something that he's not talking about. > if you go to this convenient web page, > http://www.sonice.ca/English/beverages_natural.html > you'll see that the label does say > "Ingredients: Filtered Water, Organic Whole Soybeans." > and that is all. it's fine to point out that the other flavours have lots of > stuff added, but to suggest that this guy is off base when he says that his > soy milk is only soybeans and water is misleading, because he consumes and > is talking about the natural flavour, and the website clearly states that > the ingredients of that flavour are as he stated. Thank you Katie. I was hoping that someone else would notice that and point it out. > ... > >>Consider the following web page. >>http://www.milk.mb.ca/Nutritin/myth/myths2.htm > > > just as a note, that page is run off the manitoba milk producer's web site. Not only that, but there are no sources listed for any of the "facts" that it provides, and it is full of typos, such as "... adult hyman abiltiy ...". They also use rediculous statements like: "...humankind separated into the three world races 100,000 years ago." After all, scientifically, there is only 1 human race, that is /the/ human race. Cheers, -- Blue |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"Common Man" <not.public@> wrote in message s.com... > On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:44:21 GMT, "William Hershman" > > wrote: > > > > >"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message > link.net... > >> William Hershman wrote: > >> > >> > "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message > >> > ink.net... > >> > > >> >>Common Man wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>>I'd like to get one or two of those older 'R' series > >> >> > >> >>BMWs, but business will need to pick up for me first, > >> >>as much so I can buy a house with a bigger garage as so > >> >>I can buy the bikes themselves. > >> >> > >> >>For now, I content myself with my one 1992 K75-S. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> > >> > Jon, I always pictured you as more of a 1200 guy > >> > >> Oh, man, I would *love* a K1200. I've lusted over them > >> at the BMW dealer where I bought mine, but I just can't > >> afford one, and as the father of a young (3-1/2) boy, I > >> am beginning to think I shouldn't ride a motorcycle at all. > >> > >> > but now that I think about > >> > it, that would probably be too much for your skinny lil' butt anyway. > > > >> > >> Although the 1200s look huge (to me, anyway), I've sat > >> on them, and it didn't feel like something I couldn't > >> handle. I'm rather short, though - 5'6" - and on my > >> K75, I can't get both feet flat on the ground at a > >> stop. I usually just get one foot solidly on the > >> ground and leave the other on the peg. > >> > >> Do you ride one? > >> > > > >No. I'd love to, but it's that same kid thing...I have three now, 13, 11 > >and 8. Also Pittsburgh is not the greatest two-wheeler friendly city. My > >brother had a Harley Davidson Sportster back when I was a teenager, and he > >let me ride it a few times, but I think that I'm way better off not riding. > >I tend to go to extremes, and I don't think I would make tasty roadkill. > > I didn't think Pittsburgh was the greatest four-wheeler city for that > matter either. I grew up not far from there in central PA. Why do you have that impression? The only thing that distinguishes Pittsburgh from most other cities is lots of hills and rivers. We have lots of bridges and tunnels as a result. I skate with a group of people through the streets of Pittsburgh all the time. Drivers tolerate us and bikers remarkably well. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
Common Man wrote:
> [...] > > >>You'll find a direct correlation between one's views with respect to animal >>rights and compassion for humans. Those who are AR extremists hate humans with a >>perverse passion. Those who are mildly pro-AR tend to be a little more tolerant >>of their fellow man, though their hatred remains hatred. Most ARAs and vegans >>have anti-social disorders which underly their politics and which always >>masquerade their contempt for man with a veneer of compassion for animals; from >>my interactions with so many of them, I doubt that's the only mental illness >>which affects them in the aggregate. > > > I was reading an article about Captain" Paul Watson and thought of > your post. > > "I'll admit that I'm not too fond of the human race" - "Captain" Paul > Watson, founder of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society > http://www.mensjournal.com/adventure...ra_watson.html Doesn't surprise me at all. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
usual suspect wrote:
> Common Man wrote: > >> [...] >> >> >>> You'll find a direct correlation between one's views with respect to >>> animal rights and compassion for humans. Those who are AR extremists >>> hate humans with a perverse passion. Those who are mildly pro-AR tend >>> to be a little more tolerant of their fellow man, though their hatred >>> remains hatred. Most ARAs and vegans have anti-social disorders which >>> underly their politics and which always masquerade their contempt for >>> man with a veneer of compassion for animals; from my interactions >>> with so many of them, I doubt that's the only mental illness which >>> affects them in the aggregate. >> >> >> >> I was reading an article about Captain" Paul Watson and thought of >> your post. >> >> "I'll admit that I'm not too fond of the human race" - "Captain" Paul >> Watson, founder of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society >> http://www.mensjournal.com/adventure...ra_watson.html > > > Doesn't surprise me at all. The roots of hatred for one's own race run deep. Perhaps not so strangely, the haters always seem to carve out exemptions for themselves and a few fellow travelers. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"rick etter" > wrote in message hlink.net>...
> "BlueHeron" > wrote in message > . .. > > > > > > Common Man wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 00:41:32 GMT, usual suspect > > > > wrote: > > > >>>>I must respectfully ask, What's "natural" about fake milk made of > boiled > > >>>>soybeans, sea salt, sweetener, stabilizers, and some added vitamins? > > >>>>================= > > >>> > > >>>LOL Great question, Usual.... > > >>> > > >>>Ah, the ignorance of vegans knows no bounds, does it? > > > > Which is pretty funny, considering that at least in Canada, "natural" > > flavour is simply soybean and water, which, imho is perfectly natural. > > Certainly more so than the stuff that goes into cow milk these days > > (milk, preservatives, vitamins, stabilizers, etc). > > > > http://www.sonice.ca/English/beverages_natural.html > > > > Before you go calling people ignorant, you should at least know what you > > are talking about. > ================== > Maybe you should take your own advice stupid. Learn how to use your > computer and reply to the person that actually wrote what your spewing > about. > The fact remains that the *vegan* products we're talking about are far from > natural. The example you cited is not the whole truth. You can get meats > without any additives added to the cow, or the meat afterwords. A better suggestion if you want "natural" is hunting, preferably far away from polluted areas. Or small farms that raise native animals on native diets. The word is that most modern commercial farms use a whole concoction of drugs, antibiotics, hormones and other additives to feed their stock so they can gain bulk at a faster rate. They even feed cows newspaper and feed made from animal by-product. How "natural" can that be? A cow in its natural state does not consume animal products. >You cannot > get your substitues without mono-culture farming. Again, farming is not > 'natural'. Filling the fields with posions is hardly what I would call > anything near 'natural'. And what do you think those grain-fed cows eat -- manna from heaven? > > Now if the discussion was about "plain", "original", vanilla, chocolate > > or any other flavour, then you would be right. They start joining the > > "drink" group and seriously start moving away from the 100% natural group > > > > Cheers, > > > > -- Blue P.S. I like soy milk for what it is -- not as a milk substitute, but because some of the brands just taste pretty good. They seem more refreshing than milk. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
Auntie Nettles wrote:
<...> >>================== >>Maybe you should take your own advice stupid. Learn how to use your >>computer and reply to the person that actually wrote what your spewing >>about. >>The fact remains that the *vegan* products we're talking about are far from >>natural. The example you cited is not the whole truth. You can get meats >>without any additives added to the cow, or the meat afterwords. > > A better suggestion if you want "natural" is hunting, preferably far > away from polluted areas. Why? What would you do about species overpopulations in and around larger urban areas? Are you concerned about biological diversity? http://apnews.excite.com/article/200...D834HDS01.html > Or small farms that raise native animals on native diets. I thought you activists called that "canned hunting." > The word is that most modern commercial farms use a > whole concoction of drugs, antibiotics, hormones and other additives > to feed their stock so they can gain bulk at a faster rate. Where's your proof of this "word"? The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits the use of hormones in the raising of hogs or poultry in the United States. Therefore all pork and poultry products that carry the “no hormones administered” label only represent the regulations that are already in place for pork and poultry and should not be taken to mean that the manufacturer is doing anything beyond USDA requirements for conventional pork and poultry products. http://www.eco-labels.org/label.cfm?LabelID=114 > They even > feed cows newspaper and feed made from animal by-product. How > "natural" can that be? It isn't too far off the mark in terms of dietary components, just not the same levels. Cows are not picky and will eat whatever is in the area they're being grazed. That includes carrion. > A cow in its natural state does not consume > animal products. They will eat carrion. >>You cannot >>get your substitues without mono-culture farming. Again, farming is not >>'natural'. Filling the fields with posions is hardly what I would call >>anything near 'natural'. > > And what do you think those grain-fed cows eat -- manna from heaven? Rick doesn't eat them. His are grass-fed. >>>Now if the discussion was about "plain", "original", vanilla, chocolate >>>or any other flavour, then you would be right. They start joining the >>>"drink" group and seriously start moving away from the 100% natural group >>> >>>Cheers, >>> >>>-- Blue > > P.S. I like soy milk for what it is -- not as a milk substitute, but > because some of the brands just taste pretty good. They seem more > refreshing than milk. Which ones would those be? The only one I've tried that I genuinely like and would buy again for the sake of its taste is a malted soy beverage, not a "milk" made of soy. I don't think it's worth its price, so I seldom do. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"rick etter" > wrote:
>Auntie Nettles wrote: ><...> >>>================== >>>Maybe you should take your own advice stupid. Learn how to use your >>>computer and reply to the person that actually wrote what your spewing >>>about. >>>The fact remains that the *vegan* products we're talking about are far from >>>natural. The example you cited is not the whole truth. You can get meats >>>without any additives added to the cow, or the meat afterwords. >> >> A better suggestion if you want "natural" is hunting, preferably far >> away from polluted areas. > >Why? What would you do about species overpopulations in and around larger urban >areas? Are you concerned about biological diversity? > >http://apnews.excite.com/article/200...D834HDS01.html The discussion concerned "additives in foods", not "pros and cons of hunting per se"; do try to stay on topic. For what it's worth, I have no objection to "hunting near urban/polluted areas". However, per discussion topic, the possibility exists of those populations having ingested chemicals or other contaminants from polluted areas. The same holds true for fish caught in polluted waterways. Now, if you wish to eat a possibly-contaminated catch, that's your business. On the other hand, if you wish to involve yourself in defining the term "natural" as, "that with the least amount of additives we would consider poisonous," then obviously, we would have to take these possibilities into consideration. Some toxins will accumulate in body tissue if ingested over a period of time. (Maybe not to the extent of a confined farm animal eating the farm-raised feed provided to it but still...) >> Or small farms that raise native animals on native diets. > >I thought you activists called that "canned hunting." What made you assume I was an "activist"? I hold no hardline opinions one way or the other. Also, why would you think an "activist" would suggest activities like hunting or buying meat from smaller, private farms? (Those farms as I mentioned don't necessarily involve hunting of any sort, either. Ever hear of farm-raised venison? http://www.agsites.net/links/meat(venison).html Or how about: http://www.bisonranch.com/meat.html ) >> The word is that most modern commercial farms use a >> whole concoction of drugs, antibiotics, hormones and other additives >> to feed their stock so they can gain bulk at a faster rate. > >Where's your proof of this "word"? "Evidence" dear; "proof" is a mathematical terminology. The "evidence" for this "word" can be found doing a simple Google search: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...oogle +Search or: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...&btnG =Search Now, I don't know if every last article in the search is factual, but there's your "evidence" for the "word". > The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits the use of hormones in > the raising of hogs or poultry in the United States. Hogs and poultry and ...? > Therefore all pork > and poultry products that carry the "no hormones administered" label > only represent the regulations that are already in place for pork and > poultry and should not be taken to mean that the manufacturer is doing > anything beyond USDA requirements for conventional pork and poultry > products. > http://www.eco-labels.org/label.cfm?LabelID=114 You're forgetting there are other countries besides the U.S. ...And what of the pesticides used on the crops grown to feed these animals? >> They even >> feed cows newspaper and feed made from animal by-product. How >> "natural" can that be? > >It isn't too far off the mark in terms of dietary components, just not the same >levels. Cows are not picky and will eat whatever is in the area they're being >grazed. That includes carrion. > >> A cow in its natural state does not consume >> animal products. > >They will eat carrion. > >>>You cannot >>>get your substitues without mono-culture farming. Again, farming is not >>>'natural'. Filling the fields with posions is hardly what I would call >>>anything near 'natural'. >> >> And what do you think those grain-fed cows eat -- manna from heaven? > >Rick doesn't eat them. His are grass-fed. Good for him. It doesn't change the fact that acres and acres of land are still devoted to growing crops for farm animals (which in most cases aren't even native to the land) -- all for the luxury of producing a better-flavoured product. (?) Mind you, you are correct that one can indeed locate meat products where care has been taken to ensure it's as free from contamination and additives as possible. Unfortunately such products are often not as convenient to locate in many areas, since products from smaller operations are usually not as widely-distributed. >>>>Now if the discussion was about "plain", "original", vanilla, chocolate >>>>or any other flavour, then you would be right. They start joining the >>>>"drink" group and seriously start moving away from the 100% natural group >>>> >>>>Cheers, >>>> >>>>-- Blue >> >> P.S. I like soy milk for what it is -- not as a milk substitute, but >> because some of the brands just taste pretty good. They seem more >> refreshing than milk. > >Which ones would those be? "Silk" is one; I think the other was "So Nice". As a beverage, milk just feels "stickier", although I use it for other things like cooking. I don't really like tofu and other bland items although I went through a phase where I was trying to eat it for its supposed health benefits. (I understand soy milk doesn't have the same properties, however.) >The only one I've tried that I genuinely like and >would buy again for the sake of its taste is a malted soy beverage, not a "milk" >made of soy. I don't think it's worth its price, so I seldom do. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
(Sorry, that was Usual Suspect I was replying to).
|
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"Auntie Nettles" > wrote in message om... > "rick etter" > wrote: > > >Auntie Nettles wrote: > ><...> > >>>================== > >>>Maybe you should take your own advice stupid. Learn how to use > your > >>>computer and reply to the person that actually wrote what your > spewing > >>>about. > >>>The fact remains that the *vegan* products we're talking about are > far from > >>>natural. The example you cited is not the whole truth. You can > get meats > >>>without any additives added to the cow, or the meat afterwords. > >> > >> A better suggestion if you want "natural" is hunting, preferably > far > >> away from polluted areas. > > > >Why? What would you do about species overpopulations in and around > larger urban > >areas? Are you concerned about biological diversity? > > > >http://apnews.excite.com/article/200...D834HDS01.html > > The discussion concerned "additives in foods", not "pros and cons of > hunting per se"; do try to stay on topic. ===================== Why don't you learn how to use your computer, fool? Typical loony little girl that can't keep straight all her lys, eh killer? > > For what it's worth, I have no objection to "hunting near > urban/polluted areas". However, per discussion topic, the possibility > exists of those populations having ingested chemicals or other > contaminants from polluted areas. The same holds true for fish caught > in polluted waterways. Now, if you wish to eat a > possibly-contaminated catch, that's your business. On the other hand, > if you wish to involve yourself in defining the term "natural" as, > "that with the least amount of additives we would consider poisonous," > then obviously, we would have to take these possibilities into > consideration. Some toxins will accumulate in body tissue if ingested > over a period of time. (Maybe not to the extent of a confined farm > animal eating the farm-raised feed provided to it but still...) > > >> Or small farms that raise native animals on native diets. > > > >I thought you activists called that "canned hunting." > > What made you assume I was an "activist"? I hold no hardline opinions > one way or the other. Also, why would you think an "activist" would > suggest activities like hunting or buying meat from smaller, private > farms? (Those farms as I mentioned don't necessarily involve hunting > of any sort, either. Ever hear of farm-raised venison? > http://www.agsites.net/links/meat(venison).html Or how about: > http://www.bisonranch.com/meat.html ) > > >> The word is that most modern commercial farms use a > >> whole concoction of drugs, antibiotics, hormones and other > additives > >> to feed their stock so they can gain bulk at a faster rate. > > > >Where's your proof of this "word"? > > "Evidence" dear; "proof" is a mathematical terminology. The > "evidence" for this "word" can be found doing a simple Google search: > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...oogle +Search > > or: > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...&btnG =Search > > Now, I don't know if every last article in the search is factual, but > there's your "evidence" for the "word". > > > The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits the use of hormones in > > the raising of hogs or poultry in the United States. > > Hogs and poultry and ...? > > > Therefore all pork > > and poultry products that carry the "no hormones administered" label > > only represent the regulations that are already in place for pork and > > poultry and should not be taken to mean that the manufacturer is doing > > anything beyond USDA requirements for conventional pork and poultry > > products. > > http://www.eco-labels.org/label.cfm?LabelID=114 > > You're forgetting there are other countries besides the U.S. ...And > what of the pesticides used on the crops grown to feed these animals? > > >> They even > >> feed cows newspaper and feed made from animal by-product. How > >> "natural" can that be? > > > >It isn't too far off the mark in terms of dietary components, just > not the same > >levels. Cows are not picky and will eat whatever is in the area > they're being > >grazed. That includes carrion. > > > >> A cow in its natural state does not consume > >> animal products. > > > >They will eat carrion. > > > >>>You cannot > >>>get your substitues without mono-culture farming. Again, farming > is not > >>>'natural'. Filling the fields with posions is hardly what I would > call > >>>anything near 'natural'. > >> > >> And what do you think those grain-fed cows eat -- manna from > heaven? > > > >Rick doesn't eat them. His are grass-fed. > > Good for him. It doesn't change the fact that acres and acres of land > are still devoted to growing crops for farm animals (which in most > cases aren't even native to the land) -- all for the luxury of > producing a better-flavoured product. (?) > > Mind you, you are correct that one can indeed locate meat products > where care has been taken to ensure it's as free from contamination > and additives as possible. Unfortunately such products are often not > as convenient to locate in many areas, since products from smaller > operations are usually not as widely-distributed. > > >>>>Now if the discussion was about "plain", "original", vanilla, > chocolate > >>>>or any other flavour, then you would be right. They start joining > the > >>>>"drink" group and seriously start moving away from the 100% > natural group > >>>> > >>>>Cheers, > >>>> > >>>>-- Blue > >> > >> P.S. I like soy milk for what it is -- not as a milk substitute, > but > >> because some of the brands just taste pretty good. They seem more > >> refreshing than milk. > > > >Which ones would those be? > > "Silk" is one; I think the other was "So Nice". As a beverage, milk > just feels "stickier", although I use it for other things like > cooking. > > I don't really like tofu and other bland items although I went through > a phase where I was trying to eat it for its supposed health benefits. > (I understand soy milk doesn't have the same properties, however.) > > >The only one I've tried that I genuinely like and > >would buy again for the sake of its taste is a malted soy beverage, > not a "milk" > >made of soy. I don't think it's worth its price, so I seldom do. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"Auntie Nettles" > wrote in message om... > (Sorry, that was Usual Suspect I was replying to). If you would learn how to use your computer, and not snip willy-nilly, maybe you'd do a better job... nah, too busy preaching the religion, uh?... |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"rick etter" > wrote in message ink.net>...
> "Auntie Nettles" > wrote in message > om... > > "rick etter" > wrote: > > > > >Auntie Nettles wrote: > > ><...> > > >>>================== > > >>>Maybe you should take your own advice stupid. Learn how to use > your > > >>>computer and reply to the person that actually wrote what your > spewing > > >>>about. > > >>>The fact remains that the *vegan* products we're talking about are > far from > > >>>natural. The example you cited is not the whole truth. You can > get meats > > >>>without any additives added to the cow, or the meat afterwords. > > >> > > >> A better suggestion if you want "natural" is hunting, preferably > far > > >> away from polluted areas. > > > > > >Why? What would you do about species overpopulations in and around > larger urban > > >areas? Are you concerned about biological diversity? > > > > > >http://apnews.excite.com/article/200...D834HDS01.html > > > > The discussion concerned "additives in foods", not "pros and cons of > > hunting per se"; do try to stay on topic. > ===================== > Why don't you learn how to use your computer, fool? Why don't you learn how to argue, fool?. The discussion concerned the definition of the word "natural": e.g. how much processing might be involved; what additives are in the food, etc. I merely implied that if you wish something defined as "absolutely natural with no additives whatsoever", then best find your food in nature. Otherwise, without an agreed-upon definition, you can never really reach resolution. As for "amount of processing"... well, if "processing steps" destroy the "naturalness of food", then we might as well consider bread to be "unnatural", since many steps must be taken to turn the original ingredients into the product we eat. So, what, ultimately, ought the definition of "natural" be? How is it defined according the the government? Or can we conclude that's it's an arbitrary definition? And should its definition be regulated WRT food packaging? > Typical loony little girl that can't keep straight all her lys, eh killer? *Yawn* Oh, go take your Mydol, you addled little hysteric. Is that all you have to say? ...A stupid bot-like response that doesn't relate to anything I've just written?. Maybe you should try responding to the words and ideas presented, instead of whatever paranoid hallucinations about the poster your puny little mind has decided to conjure up. Usenet reaches a global audience, so don't assume you're privy to an exclusive few. BTW, this ain't no "little girl" you're talking to, Bubba. Just because I have no patience to wade through each and every one of your childish, ad-hominem riddled posts doesn't mean I don't know how to "use a computer", either. It's just that I have very little patience for bullshit. So do keep that in mind. Actually, I'm here, really, because your little buddy keeps invoking me. Like Beetlejuice, you know. Heh heh heh... So, my only conclusion is that you people *want* me here. P.S. I'll have you people know too: there's a price to be had regarding usage of what's not yours, you know. So, keep that in mind as well. ...Put it in your pipe and smoke it, even. > > For what it's worth, I have no objection to "hunting near > > urban/polluted areas". However, per discussion topic, the possibility > > exists of those populations having ingested chemicals or other > > contaminants from polluted areas. The same holds true for fish caught > > in polluted waterways. Now, if you wish to eat a > > possibly-contaminated catch, that's your business. On the other hand, > > if you wish to involve yourself in defining the term "natural" as, > > "that with the least amount of additives we would consider poisonous," > > then obviously, we would have to take these possibilities into > > consideration. Some toxins will accumulate in body tissue if ingested > > over a period of time. (Maybe not to the extent of a confined farm > > animal eating the farm-raised feed provided to it but still...) > > > > >> Or small farms that raise native animals on native diets. > > > > > >I thought you activists called that "canned hunting." > > > > What made you assume I was an "activist"? I hold no hardline opinions > > one way or the other. Also, why would you think an "activist" would > > suggest activities like hunting or buying meat from smaller, private > > farms? (Those farms as I mentioned don't necessarily involve hunting > > of any sort, either. Ever hear of farm-raised venison? > > http://www.agsites.net/links/meat(venison).html Or how about: > > http://www.bisonranch.com/meat.html ) > > > > >> The word is that most modern commercial farms use a > > >> whole concoction of drugs, antibiotics, hormones and other > additives > > >> to feed their stock so they can gain bulk at a faster rate. > > > > > >Where's your proof of this "word"? > > > > "Evidence" dear; "proof" is a mathematical terminology. The > > "evidence" for this "word" can be found doing a simple Google search: > > > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...oogle +Search > > > > or: > > > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...&btnG =Search > > > > Now, I don't know if every last article in the search is factual, but > > there's your "evidence" for the "word". > > > > > The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits the use of > hormones in > > > the raising of hogs or poultry in the United States. > > > > Hogs and poultry and ...? > > > > > Therefore all pork > > > and poultry products that carry the "no hormones administered" > label > > > only represent the regulations that are already in place for pork > and > > > poultry and should not be taken to mean that the manufacturer is > doing > > > anything beyond USDA requirements for conventional pork and poultry > > > products. > > > http://www.eco-labels.org/label.cfm?LabelID=114 > > > > You're forgetting there are other countries besides the U.S. ...And > > what of the pesticides used on the crops grown to feed these animals? > > > > >> They even > > >> feed cows newspaper and feed made from animal by-product. How > > >> "natural" can that be? > > > > > >It isn't too far off the mark in terms of dietary components, just > not the same > > >levels. Cows are not picky and will eat whatever is in the area > they're being > > >grazed. That includes carrion. > > > > > >> A cow in its natural state does not consume > > >> animal products. > > > > > >They will eat carrion. > > > > > >>>You cannot > > >>>get your substitues without mono-culture farming. Again, farming > is not > > >>>'natural'. Filling the fields with posions is hardly what I would > call > > >>>anything near 'natural'. > > >> > > >> And what do you think those grain-fed cows eat -- manna from > heaven? > > > > > >Rick doesn't eat them. His are grass-fed. > > > > Good for him. It doesn't change the fact that acres and acres of land > > are still devoted to growing crops for farm animals (which in most > > cases aren't even native to the land) -- all for the luxury of > > producing a better-flavoured product. (?) > > > > Mind you, you are correct that one can indeed locate meat products > > where care has been taken to ensure it's as free from contamination > > and additives as possible. Unfortunately such products are often not > > as convenient to locate in many areas, since products from smaller > > operations are usually not as widely-distributed. > > > > >>>>Now if the discussion was about "plain", "original", vanilla, > chocolate > > >>>>or any other flavour, then you would be right. They start joining > the > > >>>>"drink" group and seriously start moving away from the 100% > natural group > > >>>> > > >>>>Cheers, > > >>>> > > >>>>-- Blue > > >> > > >> P.S. I like soy milk for what it is -- not as a milk substitute, > but > > >> because some of the brands just taste pretty good. They seem more > > >> refreshing than milk. > > > > > >Which ones would those be? > > > > "Silk" is one; I think the other was "So Nice". As a beverage, milk > > just feels "stickier", although I use it for other things like > > cooking. > > > > I don't really like tofu and other bland items although I went through > > a phase where I was trying to eat it for its supposed health benefits. > > (I understand soy milk doesn't have the same properties, however.) > > > > >The only one I've tried that I genuinely like and > > >would buy again for the sake of its taste is a malted soy beverage, > not a "milk" > > >made of soy. I don't think it's worth its price, so I seldom do. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"rick etter" > wrote in message ink.net>...
> "Auntie Nettles" > wrote in message > om... > > (Sorry, that was Usual Suspect I was replying to). > > > If you would learn how to use your computer, and not snip willy-nilly, maybe > you'd do a better job... nah, too busy preaching the religion, uh?... It was an oversight, my charming little hysteric. Just like your mis-spelling of a very common English word in your other reply to me. Maybe you need computer lessons as well? And do explain: what "religion" is it, exactly, that you perceive I'm "preaching?" Is objectivity a religion to you? If you weren't so preoccupied with the giant knots in your knickers you might have actually bothered to read what I *did* write -- not auto-respond with delusionary non sequiturs. So tell us: how many "vegans" or "activists" talk about obtaining meat via hunting or small-scale farming ? All it shows is how little you know about me and my opinions, "Miss Clueless". I'll take a stab and guess that you're either being paid to post misinformation here -- or you're just dumber than a box of rocks, that's all. That's about all I can conclude WRT someone assuming that a poster who's just suggested hunting as a viable food source must be a "vegan" or "activist". |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"Auntie Nettles" > wrote in message om... > "rick etter" > wrote in message ink.net>... > > "Auntie Nettles" > wrote in message > > om... > > > "rick etter" > wrote: > > > > > > >Auntie Nettles wrote: > > > ><...> > > > >>>================== > > > >>>Maybe you should take your own advice stupid. Learn how to use > > your > > > >>>computer and reply to the person that actually wrote what your > > spewing > > > >>>about. > > > >>>The fact remains that the *vegan* products we're talking about are > > far from > > > >>>natural. The example you cited is not the whole truth. You can > > get meats > > > >>>without any additives added to the cow, or the meat afterwords. > > > >> > > > >> A better suggestion if you want "natural" is hunting, preferably > > far > > > >> away from polluted areas. > > > > > > > >Why? What would you do about species overpopulations in and around > > larger urban > > > >areas? Are you concerned about biological diversity? > > > > > > > >http://apnews.excite.com/article/200...D834HDS01.html > > > > > > The discussion concerned "additives in foods", not "pros and cons of > > > hunting per se"; do try to stay on topic. > > ===================== > > Why don't you learn how to use your computer, fool? > > Why don't you learn how to argue, fool?. ====================== Already have. You're beaten, killer. The discussion concerned > the definition of the word "natural": e.g. how much processing might > be involved; what additives are in the food, etc. I merely implied > that if you wish something defined as "absolutely natural with no > additives whatsoever", then best find your food in nature. Otherwise, > without an agreed-upon definition, you can never really reach > resolution. As for "amount of processing"... well, if "processing > steps" destroy the "naturalness of food", then we might as well > consider bread to be "unnatural", since many steps must be taken to > turn the original ingredients into the product we eat. ======================= You're claim was that crap like tofu was 'natural'. It is not. Where does it occur, fool? > > So, what, ultimately, ought the definition of "natural" be? How is it > defined according the the government? Or can we conclude that's it's > an arbitrary definition? And should its definition be regulated WRT > food packaging? > > > Typical loony little girl that can't keep straight all her lys, eh killer? > > *Yawn* Oh, go take your Mydol, you addled little hysteric. =================== LOL This from the idiot that claims tofu is natural. What a hoot. I see you've can't take the heat, eh dolt? Is that > all you have to say? ...A stupid bot-like response that doesn't > relate to anything I've just written?. Maybe you should try > responding to the words and ideas presented, instead of whatever > paranoid hallucinations about the poster your puny little mind has > decided to conjure up. ================== You have no ideas worth 'argueing about, stupid. It's all baseless spew. > > Usenet reaches a global audience, so don't assume you're privy to an > exclusive few. BTW, this ain't no "little girl" you're talking to, > Bubba. Just because I have no patience to wade through each and every > one of your childish, ad-hominem riddled posts doesn't mean I don't > know how to "use a computer", either. It's just that I have very > little patience for bullshit. ================== Then you really must be able to stand yourself, eh fool? It shows in your stupidity. > > So do keep that in mind. > > Actually, I'm here, really, because your little buddy keeps invoking > me. Like Beetlejuice, you know. Heh heh heh... So, my only > conclusion is that you people *want* me here. ================== Sure, it's amusing to watch the idiots crash and burn. It's like going to the raceas, except here we always *know* that the loons like you will spew your idiocy for all to see. > > P.S. I'll have you people know too: there's a price to be had > regarding usage of what's not yours, you know. So, keep that in mind > as well. ...Put it in your pipe and smoke it, even. ================ Incoherent to the end, eh killer? > > > > For what it's worth, I have no objection to "hunting near > > > urban/polluted areas". However, per discussion topic, the possibility > > > exists of those populations having ingested chemicals or other > > > contaminants from polluted areas. The same holds true for fish caught > > > in polluted waterways. Now, if you wish to eat a > > > possibly-contaminated catch, that's your business. On the other hand, > > > if you wish to involve yourself in defining the term "natural" as, > > > "that with the least amount of additives we would consider poisonous," > > > then obviously, we would have to take these possibilities into > > > consideration. Some toxins will accumulate in body tissue if ingested > > > over a period of time. (Maybe not to the extent of a confined farm > > > animal eating the farm-raised feed provided to it but still...) > > > > > > >> Or small farms that raise native animals on native diets. > > > > > > > >I thought you activists called that "canned hunting." > > > > > > What made you assume I was an "activist"? I hold no hardline opinions > > > one way or the other. Also, why would you think an "activist" would > > > suggest activities like hunting or buying meat from smaller, private > > > farms? (Those farms as I mentioned don't necessarily involve hunting > > > of any sort, either. Ever hear of farm-raised venison? > > > http://www.agsites.net/links/meat(venison).html Or how about: > > > http://www.bisonranch.com/meat.html ) > > > > > > >> The word is that most modern commercial farms use a > > > >> whole concoction of drugs, antibiotics, hormones and other > > additives > > > >> to feed their stock so they can gain bulk at a faster rate. > > > > > > > >Where's your proof of this "word"? > > > > > > "Evidence" dear; "proof" is a mathematical terminology. The > > > "evidence" for this "word" can be found doing a simple Google search: > > > > > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...oogle +Search > > > > > > or: > > > > > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...&btnG =Search > > > > > > Now, I don't know if every last article in the search is factual, but > > > there's your "evidence" for the "word". > > > > > > > The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits the use of > > hormones in > > > > the raising of hogs or poultry in the United States. > > > > > > Hogs and poultry and ...? > > > > > > > Therefore all pork > > > > and poultry products that carry the "no hormones administered" > > label > > > > only represent the regulations that are already in place for pork > > and > > > > poultry and should not be taken to mean that the manufacturer is > > doing > > > > anything beyond USDA requirements for conventional pork and poultry > > > > products. > > > > http://www.eco-labels.org/label.cfm?LabelID=114 > > > > > > You're forgetting there are other countries besides the U.S. ...And > > > what of the pesticides used on the crops grown to feed these animals? > > > > > > >> They even > > > >> feed cows newspaper and feed made from animal by-product. How > > > >> "natural" can that be? > > > > > > > >It isn't too far off the mark in terms of dietary components, just > > not the same > > > >levels. Cows are not picky and will eat whatever is in the area > > they're being > > > >grazed. That includes carrion. > > > > > > > >> A cow in its natural state does not consume > > > >> animal products. > > > > > > > >They will eat carrion. > > > > > > > >>>You cannot > > > >>>get your substitues without mono-culture farming. Again, farming > > is not > > > >>>'natural'. Filling the fields with posions is hardly what I would > > call > > > >>>anything near 'natural'. > > > >> > > > >> And what do you think those grain-fed cows eat -- manna from > > heaven? > > > > > > > >Rick doesn't eat them. His are grass-fed. > > > > > > Good for him. It doesn't change the fact that acres and acres of land > > > are still devoted to growing crops for farm animals (which in most > > > cases aren't even native to the land) -- all for the luxury of > > > producing a better-flavoured product. (?) > > > > > > Mind you, you are correct that one can indeed locate meat products > > > where care has been taken to ensure it's as free from contamination > > > and additives as possible. Unfortunately such products are often not > > > as convenient to locate in many areas, since products from smaller > > > operations are usually not as widely-distributed. > > > > > > >>>>Now if the discussion was about "plain", "original", vanilla, > > chocolate > > > >>>>or any other flavour, then you would be right. They start joining > > the > > > >>>>"drink" group and seriously start moving away from the 100% > > natural group > > > >>>> > > > >>>>Cheers, > > > >>>> > > > >>>>-- Blue > > > >> > > > >> P.S. I like soy milk for what it is -- not as a milk substitute, > > but > > > >> because some of the brands just taste pretty good. They seem more > > > >> refreshing than milk. > > > > > > > >Which ones would those be? > > > > > > "Silk" is one; I think the other was "So Nice". As a beverage, milk > > > just feels "stickier", although I use it for other things like > > > cooking. > > > > > > I don't really like tofu and other bland items although I went through > > > a phase where I was trying to eat it for its supposed health benefits. > > > (I understand soy milk doesn't have the same properties, however.) > > > > > > >The only one I've tried that I genuinely like and > > > >would buy again for the sake of its taste is a malted soy beverage, > > not a "milk" > > > >made of soy. I don't think it's worth its price, so I seldom do. |
|
|||
|
|||
Why I like soy milk
"rick etter" > wrote in message link.net>...
> "Auntie Nettles" > wrote in message > om... > > "rick etter" > wrote in message > ink.net>... > > > "Auntie Nettles" > wrote in message > > > om... > > > > "rick etter" > wrote: > > > > > > > > >Auntie Nettles wrote: > > > > ><...> > > > > >>>================== > > > > >>>Maybe you should take your own advice stupid. Learn how to use > your > > > > >>>computer and reply to the person that actually wrote what your > spewing > > > > >>>about. > > > > >>>The fact remains that the *vegan* products we're talking about are > far from > > > > >>>natural. The example you cited is not the whole truth. You can > get meats > > > > >>>without any additives added to the cow, or the meat afterwords. > > > > >> > > > > >> A better suggestion if you want "natural" is hunting, preferably > far > > > > >> away from polluted areas. > > > > > > > > > >Why? What would you do about species overpopulations in and around > larger urban > > > > >areas? Are you concerned about biological diversity? > > > > > > > > > >http://apnews.excite.com/article/200...D834HDS01.html > > > > > > > > The discussion concerned "additives in foods", not "pros and cons of > > > > hunting per se"; do try to stay on topic. > > > ===================== > > > Why don't you learn how to use your computer, fool? > > > > Why don't you learn how to argue, fool?. > ====================== > Already have. You're beaten, killer. You're beaten, fried, and served on toast, dillweed. (Mostly by your own foot flying smack into your face). And on that note, try having a cup of coffee before you post in the morning. Exactly who do you think it is you're responding to? I'm neither a vegan nor an animal activist. I even suggested hunting as a way to obtain meat. What kind of vegan or ARA makes suggestions like that? Eh? > The discussion concerned > > the definition of the word "natural": e.g. how much processing might > > be involved; what additives are in the food, etc. I merely implied > > that if you wish something defined as "absolutely natural with no > > additives whatsoever", then best find your food in nature. Otherwise, > > without an agreed-upon definition, you can never really reach > > resolution. As for "amount of processing"... well, if "processing > > steps" destroy the "naturalness of food", then we might as well > > consider bread to be "unnatural", since many steps must be taken to > > turn the original ingredients into the product we eat. > ======================= > You're claim was that crap like tofu was 'natural'. It is not. Where does > it occur, fool? I've never "claimed" ANYTHING about tofu being "natural", you twit. Where does this supposed "claim" of mine occur? If you learned how to use your computer -- learned how to READ properly -- maybe you could distinguish between the posters you're responding to. I was merely exploring what we define as "natural"; what we might define as "additives" but NOT making any declarations one way or the other. You seem a bit threatened even by the suggestion that we explore the definition. Why is that? (FWIW, where can we find packaged steaks in nature, eh? That'd be kind of a nice convenience, wouldn't it?) > > So, what, ultimately, ought the definition of "natural" be? How is it > > defined according the the government? Or can we conclude that's it's > > an arbitrary definition? And should its definition be regulated WRT > > food packaging? > > > > > Typical loony little girl that can't keep straight all her lys, eh > killer? > > > > *Yawn* Oh, go take your Mydol, you addled little hysteric. > =================== > LOL This from the idiot that claims tofu is natural. What a hoot. I see > you've can't take the heat, eh dolt? ROFLMAO. You crow like a rooster with about as much brains. ...OK, my confused little birdie, locate this supposed "claim" of mine where I've declared tofu to be "natural". Don't you know how to do an Author search? ...You don't? Well go he http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?hl=en See the little section that says "Subject"? Type: "tofu" in the box labeled "with all the words". Got it? ...Good. Now see the little box that says "Author"? Type "Auntie Nettles" in that box. Make sure you spell everything correctly. Got it? ....Good. (...No, no, not "Rubystars" or "pearl". "Auntie Nettles". A different poster entirely.) And when you come up empty-handed, then we'll all know who the "dolt" is who "doesn't know how to use a computer". ...And that "dolt" would be YOU, son. > Is that > > all you have to say? ...A stupid bot-like response that doesn't > > relate to anything I've just written?. Maybe you should try > > responding to the words and ideas presented, instead of whatever > > paranoid hallucinations about the poster your puny little mind has > > decided to conjure up. > ================== > You have no ideas worth 'argueing about, stupid. It's all baseless spew. Translation: you didn't read anything I wrote; you just assumed I was somebody else saying something else so you spewed a stock response that just made you look like a drunk retard. Is it really too much effort for you to comprehend the idea that there might be more than one other person in the thread? > > Usenet reaches a global audience, so don't assume you're privy to an > > exclusive few. BTW, this ain't no "little girl" you're talking to, > > Bubba. Just because I have no patience to wade through each and every > > one of your childish, ad-hominem riddled posts doesn't mean I don't > > know how to "use a computer", either. It's just that I have very > > little patience for bullshit. > ================== > Then you really must be able to stand yourself, eh fool? It shows in your > stupidity. BWAHAHAHAHA! Too funny, Projection Boy. This coming from someone who can't read well enough to distinguish between posters; assumes somebody who suggested HUNTING as a viable way to obtain natural meat must be a "vegan" or "animal activist"; accuses somebody of "not knowing how to use a computer" yet gets his attributions wrong, and can't even do a simple Author Search on Google. Good God, if you were any more dense they'd name you Number 118 on the Periodic Table of Elements. What I'm guessing here is that the ideas I wrote in my previous entry were just tooooooo complicated for you to sort out, so you just closed your eyes, decided in your head I was *someone else* writing *something else,* shouted, "duh... you stupid veggiehead!" and declared victory. Unfortunately, your deluding yourself in this way doesn't make you appear any smarter; nor does it make you appear as though you've "won" any arguments, fool. Next time, get a cup of coffee, calm down, and actually try to read WHO and WHAT it is you're responding to. [snip the rest of your BS, as I'm in a charitable mood and you're not worth the trouble]. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Making Whole Milk from Skim Milk and Heavy Cream | General Cooking | |||
No Milk (Was: Harnessing the sun to keep milk fresh : A storyfrom Goa) | Vegan | |||
Skim milk vs Powdered Milk | Diabetic | |||
Soy Milk - When can it be used in lieu of "regular" milk ??? | General Cooking | |||
Sweet condensed milk as a whole milk substitute? | General Cooking |