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 Search this Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 26-12-2009, 09:04 PM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,sci.econ,alt.philosophy
Ha Ha is offline
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3
Default "veganism" isn't what it purports to be

ex-PFC Wintergreen wrote:

All "vegans" start by believing a logical fallacy:

If I consume animal products, I cause animals to suffer and die.

I don't consume any animal products;

therefore, I don't cause any animals to suffer and die.


All vegans?
rather a sweeping statement!


  #17 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 26-12-2009, 09:11 PM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,alt.philosophy
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2
Default Sorry, vegans: Brussels sprouts like to live, too


Actually its worse than that. In increasing the intake of vegetables,
Vegans are responsible for the death of more animal life than a meat
eater.
As a meat eater I can subsist on the life of one animal for a long
time. To eat a vegetable I am responsible for the death of many
insects that have to be killed to protect that life if that plant.




On Dec 24, 8:17*pm, ex-PFC Wintergreen
wrote:
DC wrote:
NY Times


In his new book, “Eating Animals” (Amazon.com:
http://snurl.com/EatAni), the novelist Jonathan Safran
Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
oblivious slacker who “waffled among any number of diets”
to “committed vegetarian.” Last month, Gary Steiner, a
philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
page of The New York Timeshttp://snurl.com/ttw8wthat
people should strive to be “strict ethical vegans” like
himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
finery is nothing less than “outright murder,” he said...


But before we cede the entire moral penthouse to “committed
vegetarians” and “strong ethical vegans,” we might consider
that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok
than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my
Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument
or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it
that way. The more that scientists learn about the
complexity of plants — their keen sensitivity to the
environment, the speed with which they react to changes in
the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks
that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit
help from afar — the more impressed researchers become, and
the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill
backdrop...


Continued:http://snurl.com/ttw97


"vegans" are not "more ethical" for refusing to consume animal products.
* In fact, the very fact of being "vegan" is an indication that the
person describing himself as such is morally bankrupt, because
"veganism" isn't about doing the right thing at all; it's purely about
making an invidious, sanctimonious comparison with others and then
patting oneself on the back.


  #18 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 26-12-2009, 09:22 PM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,alt.philosophy
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,025
Default Sorry, vegans: Brussels sprouts like to live, too


[email protected] wrote in message ...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 01:49:32 -0000, "The Consulate"
wrote:

A vegan merely respects other life and accords life to
others, knowing full well that having a clean conscience and
eating to live rather than living to eat are far far better
than the greed and gluttony of the masses.


· Vegans


Cram the boilerplate bullshit up your ass.

  #19 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 26-12-2009, 09:46 PM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,sci.econ,alt.philosophy
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,025
Default "veganism" isn't what it purports to be


"Ha" wrote
ex-PFC Wintergreen wrote:

All "vegans" start by believing a logical fallacy:

If I consume animal products, I cause animals to suffer and die.

I don't consume any animal products;

therefore, I don't cause any animals to suffer and die.


All vegans?
rather a sweeping statement!


You can replace "All vegans" with "Vegans" (in general) and not lose the
validity of the message.

Are you implicitly agreeing with the message but claiming to be an
exception?

  #20 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 26-12-2009, 09:46 PM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,sci.econ,alt.philosophy
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,025
Default Sorry, vegans: Brussels sprouts like to live, too


"Rupert" wrote in message
...
On Dec 25, 7:17 am, ex-PFC Wintergreen
wrote:
DC wrote:
NY Times


In his new book, “Eating Animals” (Amazon.com:
http://snurl.com/EatAni), the novelist Jonathan Safran
Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
oblivious slacker who “waffled among any number of diets”
to “committed vegetarian.” Last month, Gary Steiner, a
philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
page of The New York Timeshttp://snurl.com/ttw8wthat
people should strive to be “strict ethical vegans” like
himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
finery is nothing less than “outright murder,” he said...


But before we cede the entire moral penthouse to “committed
vegetarians” and “strong ethical vegans,” we might consider
that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok
than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my
Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument
or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it
that way. The more that scientists learn about the
complexity of plants — their keen sensitivity to the
environment, the speed with which they react to changes in
the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks
that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit
help from afar — the more impressed researchers become, and
the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill
backdrop...


Continued:http://snurl.com/ttw97


"vegans" are not "more ethical" for refusing to consume animal products.
In fact, the very fact of being "vegan" is an indication that the
person describing himself as such is morally bankrupt, because
"veganism" isn't about doing the right thing at all; it's purely about
making an invidious, sanctimonious comparison with others and then
patting oneself on the back.


You still haven't got tired of talking claptrap, have you, Ball?
-------

That's not claptrap, it is quite true. Of course vegans want to do what is
right, but sanctimony is part of it. I've been on both sides of the issue,
and the charge is valid.




  #21 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 26-12-2009, 09:49 PM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,sci.econ,alt.philosophy
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 55
Default "veganism" isn't what it purports to be

Ha wrote:
ex-PFC Wintergreen wrote:

All "vegans" start by believing a logical fallacy:

If I consume animal products, I cause animals to suffer and die.

I don't consume any animal products;

therefore, I don't cause any animals to suffer and die.


All vegans?


Without exception. They all start with that, and many - probably most -
never move off it. Look at the myriad "vegan" web sites that extol
"veganism" as a means of living a "cruelty-free" or "death-free"
lifestyle. Those people, by necessary implication, believe in the
logical fallacy.

Here's a claim at the terrorist Animal Liberation Front's web site:

You don't have to do it over night. You can take small steps by
eliminating one cruel product at a time until you arrive at your
ultimate goal of a cruelty-free diet.

http://www.animalliberation.org.au/vego.php

By the way, there is a poster in this very newsgroup who is a terrorist
and card-carrying supporter of the terrorist organization ALF.

Here's another instance:

Whether you're hosting a vegan at your holiday table, or looking for
holiday recipes as a vegan yourself, it can be a daunting task to
find recipes that accommodate the cruelty-free diet

http://www.ehow.com/way_5498650_vega...y-recipes.html

Here's a PETA page hawking supposedly "cruelty-free" products:
http://tinyurl.com/ycvwtzf. The *only* reason they consider these
products "cruelty-free" is because they don't contain animal parts - in
other words, they are under the influence of the logical fallacy in
claiming the products to be "cruelty-free". They don't take into
consideration any animals that are killed in the course of obtaining the
ingredients of the products, manufacturing the products, or distributing
them.

Yes, indeed: *all* "vegans" start by believing the logical fallacy, and
many if not most of them never leave it. Those who do abandon it merely
move to another, equally invalid moral pose. In short, "veganism" has
nothing whatever to do with /real/ ethics. It's all about the pose.
  #22 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 26-12-2009, 09:52 PM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,alt.philosophy
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 55
Default Sorry, vegans: Brussels sprouts like to live, too

chazwin wrote:
Actually its worse than that. In increasing the intake of vegetables,
Vegans are responsible for the death of more animal life than a meat
eater.


Not necessarily, but it's really beside the point. The real point is,
they never really attempt to measure their death toll. It's rather
obvious that some possible omnivores' diets have a lower death toll than
some "vegan" diets.


As a meat eater I can subsist on the life of one animal for a long
time.


But more likely than not, you don't.


To eat a vegetable I am responsible for the death of many
insects that have to be killed to protect that life if that plant.


Depends. If you lived entirely on fruits and nuts that you personally
harvested from trees - preferably after they already fell off the trees
- then you probably would have a lower death toll than virtually all
omnivores. But of course, no one does that.






On Dec 24, 8:17 pm, ex-PFC Wintergreen
wrote:
DC wrote:
NY Times
In his new book, “Eating Animals” (Amazon.com:
http://snurl.com/EatAni), the novelist Jonathan Safran
Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
oblivious slacker who “waffled among any number of diets”
to “committed vegetarian.” Last month, Gary Steiner, a
philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
page of The New York Timeshttp://snurl.com/ttw8wthat
people should strive to be “strict ethical vegans” like
himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
finery is nothing less than “outright murder,” he said...
But before we cede the entire moral penthouse to “committed
vegetarians” and “strong ethical vegans,” we might consider
that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok
than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my
Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument
or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it
that way. The more that scientists learn about the
complexity of plants — their keen sensitivity to the
environment, the speed with which they react to changes in
the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks
that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit
help from afar — the more impressed researchers become, and
the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill
backdrop...
Continued:http://snurl.com/ttw97

"vegans" are not "more ethical" for refusing to consume animal products.
In fact, the very fact of being "vegan" is an indication that the
person describing himself as such is morally bankrupt, because
"veganism" isn't about doing the right thing at all; it's purely about
making an invidious, sanctimonious comparison with others and then
patting oneself on the back.


  #23 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 26-12-2009, 09:57 PM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,sci.econ,alt.philosophy
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 55
Default "veganism" isn't what it purports to be

Dutch wrote:

"Ha" wrote
ex-PFC Wintergreen wrote:

All "vegans" start by believing a logical fallacy:

If I consume animal products, I cause animals to suffer and die.

I don't consume any animal products;

therefore, I don't cause any animals to suffer and die.


All vegans?
rather a sweeping statement!


You can replace "All vegans" with "Vegans" (in general) and not lose the
validity of the message.

Are you implicitly agreeing with the message but claiming to be an
exception?


He might be, but he's lying.

I don't have any problem making the assertion "all vegans". They do
*all* begin by believing that being "vegan" equates to living a
"cruelty-free" or "death-free" lifestyle.
  #24 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 26-12-2009, 09:58 PM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,sci.econ,alt.philosophy
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 55
Default Sorry, vegans: Brussels sprouts like to live, too

Dutch wrote:

"Rupert" wrote in message
...
On Dec 25, 7:17 am, ex-PFC Wintergreen
wrote:
DC wrote:
NY Times


In his new book, “Eating Animals” (Amazon.com:
http://snurl.com/EatAni), the novelist Jonathan Safran
Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
oblivious slacker who “waffled among any number of diets”
to “committed vegetarian.” Last month, Gary Steiner, a
philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
page of The New York Timeshttp://snurl.com/ttw8wthat
people should strive to be “strict ethical vegans” like
himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
finery is nothing less than “outright murder,” he said...


But before we cede the entire moral penthouse to “committed
vegetarians” and “strong ethical vegans,” we might consider
that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok
than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my
Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument
or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it
that way. The more that scientists learn about the
complexity of plants — their keen sensitivity to the
environment, the speed with which they react to changes in
the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks
that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit
help from afar — the more impressed researchers become, and
the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill
backdrop...


Continued:http://snurl.com/ttw97


"vegans" are not "more ethical" for refusing to consume animal products.
In fact, the very fact of being "vegan" is an indication that the
person describing himself as such is morally bankrupt, because
"veganism" isn't about doing the right thing at all; it's purely about
making an invidious, sanctimonious comparison with others and then
patting oneself on the back.


You still haven't got tired of talking claptrap, have you, Ball?
-------

That's not claptrap, it is quite true. Of course vegans want to do what is
right,


I'm not persuaded of that at all.


but sanctimony is part of it. I've been on both sides of the issue,
and the charge is valid.


  #25 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 26-12-2009, 10:27 PM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,sci.econ,alt.philosophy
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,025
Default Sorry, vegans: Brussels sprouts like to live, too


"ex-PFC Wintergreen" wrote in message
...
Dutch wrote:

"Rupert" wrote in message
...
On Dec 25, 7:17 am, ex-PFC Wintergreen
wrote:
DC wrote:
NY Times

In his new book, “Eating Animals” (Amazon.com:
http://snurl.com/EatAni), the novelist Jonathan Safran
Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
oblivious slacker who “waffled among any number of diets”
to “committed vegetarian.” Last month, Gary Steiner, a
philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
page of The New York Timeshttp://snurl.com/ttw8wthat
people should strive to be “strict ethical vegans” like
himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
finery is nothing less than “outright murder,” he said...

But before we cede the entire moral penthouse to “committed
vegetarians” and “strong ethical vegans,” we might consider
that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok
than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my
Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument
or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it
that way. The more that scientists learn about the
complexity of plants — their keen sensitivity to the
environment, the speed with which they react to changes in
the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks
that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit
help from afar — the more impressed researchers become, and
the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill
backdrop...

Continued:http://snurl.com/ttw97

"vegans" are not "more ethical" for refusing to consume animal products.
In fact, the very fact of being "vegan" is an indication that the
person describing himself as such is morally bankrupt, because
"veganism" isn't about doing the right thing at all; it's purely about
making an invidious, sanctimonious comparison with others and then
patting oneself on the back.


You still haven't got tired of talking claptrap, have you, Ball?
-------

That's not claptrap, it is quite true. Of course vegans want to do what
is
right,



I'm not persuaded of that at all.


I do think that is the initial intent for many at least partially, I mean
who doesn't want to do the right thing? Others begin by aiming for optimum
health. It morphs as the experience sinks in and the ego creeps in. When the
vegan begins her journey the focus is primarily on the issue of the
suffering of animals. The ego is what introduces the whole "my diet is
superior to your diet" syndrome. Once the ideas of not consuming animal
products and eliminating suffering are linked in the brain and welded by the
rush of ego gratification the fallacy you describe so well becomes embedded.


but sanctimony is part of it. I've been on both sides of the issue,
and the charge is valid.



  #26 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 26-12-2009, 11:13 PM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,sci.econ,alt.philosophy
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 55
Default Sorry, vegans: Brussels sprouts like to live, too

Dutch wrote:

"ex-PFC Wintergreen" wrote in message
...
Dutch wrote:

"Rupert" wrote in message
...
On Dec 25, 7:17 am, ex-PFC Wintergreen
wrote:
DC wrote:
NY Times

In his new book, “Eating Animals” (Amazon.com:
http://snurl.com/EatAni), the novelist Jonathan Safran
Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
oblivious slacker who “waffled among any number of diets”
to “committed vegetarian.” Last month, Gary Steiner, a
philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
page of The New York Timeshttp://snurl.com/ttw8wthat
people should strive to be “strict ethical vegans” like
himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
finery is nothing less than “outright murder,” he said...

But before we cede the entire moral penthouse to “committed
vegetarians” and “strong ethical vegans,” we might consider
that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok
than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my
Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument
or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it
that way. The more that scientists learn about the
complexity of plants — their keen sensitivity to the
environment, the speed with which they react to changes in
the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks
that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit
help from afar — the more impressed researchers become, and
the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill
backdrop...

Continued:http://snurl.com/ttw97

"vegans" are not "more ethical" for refusing to consume animal
products.
In fact, the very fact of being "vegan" is an indication that the
person describing himself as such is morally bankrupt, because
"veganism" isn't about doing the right thing at all; it's purely about
making an invidious, sanctimonious comparison with others and then
patting oneself on the back.

You still haven't got tired of talking claptrap, have you, Ball?
-------

That's not claptrap, it is quite true. Of course vegans want to do
what is
right,



I'm not persuaded of that at all.


I do think that is the initial intent for many at least partially, I
mean who doesn't want to do the right thing?


More than doing the right thing, "vegans" seem to be driven by a wish
not to do the wrong thing. They view what "everybody else" does as the
wrong thing, and they decide not to do it. It starts at the very
beginning as a comparison with others.

Most people who honestly think about trying to do the right thing don't
conceive of it as a contrast with what others are doing. I don't
consciously refrain from robbing banks out of a fear that if I did rob
banks, it would make me too much like others; I refrain from robbing
banks because, irrespective of what anyone else thinks, I know that it's
wrong to rob banks. I also don't refrain from robbing banks out of a
wish to think well of myself.

As you note below, ego plays a huge role in "vegans'" formulation of
what they think right behavior is. For properly ethical people, ego
plays no part in it.


Others begin by aiming for
optimum health. It morphs as the experience sinks in and the ego creeps
in. When the vegan begins her journey the focus is primarily on the
issue of the suffering of animals. The ego is what introduces the whole
"my diet is superior to your diet" syndrome. Once the ideas of not
consuming animal products and eliminating suffering are linked in the
brain and welded by the rush of ego gratification the fallacy you
describe so well becomes embedded.


but sanctimony is part of it. I've been on both sides of the issue,
and the charge is valid.

  #27 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-12-2009, 02:54 AM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,sci.econ,alt.philosophy
Ha Ha is offline
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3
Default "veganism" isn't what it purports to be

Dutch wrote:
"Ha" wrote
ex-PFC Wintergreen wrote:

All "vegans" start by believing a logical fallacy:

If I consume animal products, I cause animals to suffer and die.

I don't consume any animal products;

therefore, I don't cause any animals to suffer and die.

All vegans?
rather a sweeping statement!


You can replace "All vegans" with "Vegans" (in general) and not lose the
validity of the message.

Are you implicitly agreeing with the message but claiming to be an
exception?

no. I am not a vegan
  #28 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-12-2009, 02:55 AM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,sci.econ,alt.philosophy
Ha Ha is offline
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3
Default "veganism" isn't what it purports to be

ex-PFC Wintergreen wrote:
Dutch wrote:
"Ha" wrote
ex-PFC Wintergreen wrote:

All "vegans" start by believing a logical fallacy:

If I consume animal products, I cause animals to suffer and die.

I don't consume any animal products;

therefore, I don't cause any animals to suffer and die.
All vegans?
rather a sweeping statement!

You can replace "All vegans" with "Vegans" (in general) and not lose the
validity of the message.

Are you implicitly agreeing with the message but claiming to be an
exception?


He might be, but he's lying.


and you're assuming

  #29 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-12-2009, 04:58 AM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg,alt.philosophy
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 55
Default Sorry, vegans: Brussels sprouts like to live, too

Dutch wrote:

[email protected] wrote in message ...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 01:49:32 -0000, "The Consulate"
wrote:

A vegan merely respects other life and accords life to
others, knowing full well that having a clean conscience and
eating to live rather than living to eat are far far better
than the greed and gluttony of the masses.


· Vegans


Cram the boilerplate bullshit up your ass.


It showed very little thought when it was first written, and the tedious
repetition of it shows even less thought.
  #30 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-12-2009, 05:03 AM posted to alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.food.veg
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1
Default Sorry, vegans: Brussels sprouts like to live, too

DC wrote:
NY Times

In his new book, “Eating Animals” (Amazon.com:
http://snurl.com/EatAni ), the novelist Jonathan Safran
Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
oblivious slacker who “waffled among any number of diets”
to “committed vegetarian.” Last month, Gary Steiner, a
philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
page of The New York Times http://snurl.com/ttw8w that
people should strive to be “strict ethical vegans” like
himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
finery is nothing less than “outright murder,” he said...

But before we cede the entire moral penthouse to “committed
vegetarians” and “strong ethical vegans,” we might consider
that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok
than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my
Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument
or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it
that way. The more that scientists learn about the
complexity of plants — their keen sensitivity to the
environment, the speed with which they react to changes in
the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks
that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit
help from afar — the more impressed researchers become, and
the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill
backdrop...

Continued: http://snurl.com/ttw97


There is no such thing as a "death-free" diet. Living creatures are
killed in order to provide humans with food.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Brussels Sprouts Melba's Jammin' General Cooking 6 04-03-2013 11:07 PM
brussels sprouts sf[_9_] General Cooking 6 02-03-2013 08:22 PM
Brussels Sprouts Julian Vrieslander[_3_] General Cooking 1 27-02-2013 09:39 AM
Brussels Sprouts Travis and Jenn Bartimus Recipes (moderated) 0 13-07-2006 01:30 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"

 

Copyright © 2017