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
  #1 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 05-03-2011, 01:40 AM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.fan.jai-maharaj,alt.religion.hindu,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 6
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat


and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote in
message news:[email protected]
Chapter 43: T he Meat-Free Life

Description:

Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian & Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat


I don't think about it that much. I just find meat unappetizing. The less
I ate of it, the less I wanted it.



  #2 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 06-03-2011, 10:45 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.fan.jai-maharaj,alt.religion.hindu,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,652
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat

On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 20:40:42 -0500, "Tim923" wrote:


and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote in
message news:[email protected]
Chapter 43: T he Meat-Free Life

Description:

Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian & Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat


I don't think about it that much. I just find meat unappetizing. The less
I ate of it, the less I wanted it.


There are people who like eating meat but feel so badly about doing so that
they become veg*n. Those are the people who are a shame to see. People like
yourself who just don't like meat and are honest about that, THEN you develope
the guilt thing too, makes a bit more sense. You can honestly say you don't care
that it contributes to more deaths to eat tofu than it does to eat grass raised
beef, or that it contributes to a lot more deaths to drink rice milk than cow
milk, especially grass raised. You probably would never be so honest, but you
COULD be. A person who becomes veg*n for supposedly ethical reasons but does
like the taste of animal products wouldn't have that excuse to fall back on.
  #3 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 07-03-2011, 02:48 AM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,258
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against EatingMeat

On 3/6/2011 2:45 PM, [email protected] wrote:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 20:40:42 -0500, wrote:


and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote in
message news:[email protected]
Chapter 43: T he Meat-Free Life

Description:

Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian& Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat


I don't think about it that much. I just find meat unappetizing. The less
I ate of it, the less I wanted it.


There are people who like eating meat but feel so badly about doing so that


....that they start cooking up ****witted illogical bullshit rationales
to justify it - like, the animals "benefit" by existing before they are
killed.

You, for example.
  #4 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 07-03-2011, 08:52 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,258
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against EatingMeat

****wit David Harrison, criminal breeder of fighting roosters, lied:
On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:48:35 -0800, George Plimpton wrote:

****wit David Harrison, criminal breeder of fighting roosters, lied:


There are people who like eating meat but feel so badly about doing so that
they become veg*n.


...that they start cooking up ****witted illogical bullshit rationales
to justify it - like, the animals "benefit" by existing before they are
killed.

You, for example.


Some animals benefit from it


No, Goober. *No* animals benefit by existing, Goober.
  #5 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 07-03-2011, 11:45 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,652
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:48:35 -0800, Goo wrote:

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 14:45:21 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 20:40:42 -0500, "Tim923" wrote:

and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote in
message news:[email protected]
Chapter 43: T he Meat-Free Life

Description:

Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian & Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat

I don't think about it that much. I just find meat unappetizing. The less
I ate of it, the less I wanted it.


There are people who like eating meat but feel so badly about doing so that
they become veg*n.


...that they start cooking up ****witted illogical bullshit rationales
to justify it - like, the animals "benefit" by existing before they are
killed.

You, for example.


Some animals benefit from it and others don't Goober, but eliminationists
necessarily can't make a distinction between which do and which do not because
being honest about the fact that some do works against the elimination
objective. Those of us who favor decent AW over elimination can and do
appreciate when livestock appear to have lives of positive value for the
animals. In fact as we've seen it is ONLY eliminationists who have reason to
oppose appreciation for that particular aspect of the situation, and all
eliminationists must necessarily be opposed to it. No one else...ONLY
eliminationists.

Those are the people who are a shame to see. People like
yourself who just don't like meat and are honest about that, THEN you develope
the guilt thing too, makes a bit more sense. You can honestly say you don't care
that it contributes to more deaths to eat tofu than it does to eat grass raised
beef, or that it contributes to a lot more deaths to drink rice milk than cow
milk, especially grass raised. You probably would never be so honest, but you
COULD be. A person who becomes veg*n for supposedly ethical reasons but does
like the taste of animal products wouldn't have that excuse to fall back on.



  #6 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 08-03-2011, 06:29 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 6
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat


GP might be right. No animals benefit by existing. They do not know
what it means to benefit from something. All they need is to be left
alone to get their food, and money for goods and services, etc.

As far as Goober's comment about Eliminationists (AW) and others, they
have to follow what I say (The One Living God on Earth). Or else.

I ain't changing from Use of Reason, Truth and Non-Violence.

We just shoot them, and then talk to them. We visit with them and talk
to them again. And then we might give up or not give up. Who knows
what the hell happens in this World these days.

Keep cool.

- HSN.


On Mar 7, 12:52*pm, George Plimpton wrote:
****wit David Harrison, criminal breeder of fighting roosters, lied:

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:48:35 -0800, George Plimpton wrote:


****wit David Harrison, criminal breeder of fighting roosters, lied:


* * There are people who like eating meat but feel so badly about doing so that
they become veg*n.


...that they start cooking up ****witted illogical bullshit rationales
to justify it - like, the animals "benefit" by existing before they are
killed.


You, for example.


* * *Some animals benefit from it


No, Goober. **No* animals benefit by existing, Goober.


  #7 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 08-03-2011, 08:59 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,258
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against EatingMeat

****wit David Harrison, criminal breeder of fighting roosters when he's
not busy packing Ron Hamilton's fudge, lied:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2011 12:52:05 -0800, George Plimpton wrote:

****wit David Harrison, criminal breeder of fighting roosters when he's not busy packing Ron Hamilton's fudge, lied:

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:48:35 -0800, George Plimpton wrote:

****wit David Harrison, criminal breeder of fighting roosters when he's not busy packing Ron Hamilton's fudge, lied:


There are people who like eating meat but feel so badly about doing so that

...that they start cooking up ****witted illogical bullshit rationales
to justify it - like, the animals "benefit" by existing before they are
killed.

You, for example.

Some animals benefit from it and


No, Goober. *No* animals benefit by existing, Goober.


LOL. Yes it sure does


No, Goober. No animals benefit by existing, Goober.


*No* animals benefit by existing


Many appear to


No, they don't.
  #8 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 08-03-2011, 10:30 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,028
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat


[email protected] wrote
*No* animals benefit by existing


Many appear to Goo, so what do you want people to think prevents them
from
benefitting as they appear to, and how do you want people to think it
prevents
them?


Logic, here's one argument:

Two pigs exist, one has a good life provided by the farmer, Salatin, the
other has a life full of pain, suffering and deprivation provided by Tyson.

One pig benefits, the other suffers and is harmed, yet both exist in equal
measure.

Therefore existence itself is clearly not the source of benefit.



  #9 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 08-03-2011, 11:40 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,652
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat

On Mon, 07 Mar 2011 12:52:05 -0800, Goo wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2011 15:45:35 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:48:35 -0800, Goo wrote:

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 14:45:21 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 20:40:42 -0500, "Tim923" wrote:

and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote in
message news:[email protected]
Chapter 43: T he Meat-Free Life

Description:

Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian & Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat

I don't think about it that much. I just find meat unappetizing. The less
I ate of it, the less I wanted it.

There are people who like eating meat but feel so badly about doing so that
they become veg*n.

...that they start cooking up ****witted illogical bullshit rationales
to justify it - like, the animals "benefit" by existing before they are
killed.

You, for example.


Some animals benefit from it and others don't Goober, but eliminationists
necessarily can't make a distinction between which do and which do not because
being honest about the fact that some do works against the elimination
objective.


No


LOL. Yes it sure does Goo.

*No* animals benefit by existing


Many appear to Goo, so what do you want people to think prevents them from
benefitting as they appear to, and how do you want people to think it prevents
them?
  #10 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 09-03-2011, 08:19 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat

On Mar 9, 3:07*pm, [email protected] wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 14:30:18 -0800, "Dutch" wrote:

[email protected] wrote
*No* animals benefit by existing


* *Many appear to Goo, so what do you want people to think prevents them
from
benefitting as they appear to, and how do you want people to think it
prevents
them?


Logic, here's one argument:


Two pigs exist, one has a good life provided by the farmer, Salatin, the
other has a life full of pain, suffering and deprivation provided by Tyson.


One pig benefits, the other suffers and is harmed, yet both exist in equal
measure.


Therefore existence itself is clearly not the source of benefit.


* * Life can and often does have positive value for animals


No, ****wit. "Life" does not. Things in life do. Life does not.

You have already been instructed in this.


  #11 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 09-03-2011, 09:32 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,028
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat

[email protected] wrote in message ...
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 14:30:18 -0800, "Dutch" wrote:


[email protected] wrote
*No* animals benefit by existing

Many appear to Goo, so what do you want people to think prevents them
from
benefitting as they appear to, and how do you want people to think it
prevents
them?


Logic, here's one argument:

Two pigs exist, one has a good life provided by the farmer, Salatin, the
other has a life full of pain,


From what?


Doesn't matter, anything, sleeping on cold concrete or slats.

suffering


From what?


What does it matter, it's a theoretical example.

and deprivation


From what?


Light, space, access to earth, whatever, it's unimportant what from, it's
theoretical.


provided by Tyson.

One pig benefits, the other suffers and is harmed, yet both exist in equal
measure.

Therefore existence itself is clearly not the source of benefit.


Life can and often does have positive value for animals,


Both of the animals in the theoretical example above had "life" in exactly
the same measure and manner, yet one suffered while the other thrived. That
PROVES that "life" is not the source of benefit.

regardless of how
you try to pretend it doesn't. Your little pretendings that nothing has
ever
benefitted from its existence is just more STUPID! eliminationist attempts
at
STUPID! trickery. Your stupid attempt at stupid trickery not only doesn't
work
on me, but you can't give me anything to even try pretending along with
you.
Here, I'll give you another chance to try:

What do you want people to believe prevents animals from benefitting
from
their lives when they appear to be of positive value to the animals, and
how do
you think it prevents it?


It's not trickery, the LoL is verbal trickery and my logic demonstrates it.

  #12 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 09-03-2011, 11:07 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,652
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat

On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 14:30:18 -0800, "Dutch" wrote:


[email protected] wrote
*No* animals benefit by existing


Many appear to Goo, so what do you want people to think prevents them
from
benefitting as they appear to, and how do you want people to think it
prevents
them?


Logic, here's one argument:

Two pigs exist, one has a good life provided by the farmer, Salatin, the
other has a life full of pain,


From what?

suffering


From what?

and deprivation


From what?

provided by Tyson.

One pig benefits, the other suffers and is harmed, yet both exist in equal
measure.

Therefore existence itself is clearly not the source of benefit.


Life can and often does have positive value for animals, regardless of how
you try to pretend it doesn't. Your little pretendings that nothing has ever
benefitted from its existence is just more STUPID! eliminationist attempts at
STUPID! trickery. Your stupid attempt at stupid trickery not only doesn't work
on me, but you can't give me anything to even try pretending along with you.
Here, I'll give you another chance to try:

What do you want people to believe prevents animals from benefitting from
their lives when they appear to be of positive value to the animals, and how do
you think it prevents it?
  #13 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 10-03-2011, 09:06 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat

On Mar 10, 3:48*pm, [email protected] wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:32:44 -0800, "Dutch" wrote:
[email protected] wrote in messagenews:[email protected] .com....
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 14:30:18 -0800, "Dutch" wrote:


[email protected] wrote
*No* animals benefit by existing


* *Many appear to Goo, so what do you want people to think prevents them
from
benefitting as they appear to, and how do you want people to think it
prevents
them?


Logic, here's one argument:


Two pigs exist, one has a good life provided by the farmer, Salatin, the
other has a life full of pain,


* *From what?


Doesn't matter, anything, sleeping on cold concrete or slats.


* * IMO they should be provided with something better, but


No, you don't believe that

I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
that all of the animals I eat had terrible
lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
because I don't care about them at all, but I
would just ignore their suffering.
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999

I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care
enough to make the effort.
Goo/****wit 31 July 2003 http://tinyurl.com/2v5ayqy

I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
also....
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999


suffering


* *From what?


What does it matter, it's a theoretical example.


It doesn't matter. ****wit is just trying to waste your time, and
avoid facing the truth.


and deprivation


* *From what?


Light, space, access to earth, whatever, it's unimportant what from, it's
theoretical.


* * We'll just forget that one since


Since you're just bullshitting and stalling.


provided by Tyson.


One pig benefits, the other suffers and is harmed, yet both exist in equal
measure.


Therefore existence itself is clearly not the source of benefit.


* *Life can and often does have positive value for animals,


Both of the animals in the theoretical example above had "life" in exactly
the same measure and manner, yet one suffered while the other thrived. That
PROVES that "life" is not the source of benefit.




[snip cracker bullshit and hand-waving]



regardless of how
you try to pretend it doesn't. Your little pretendings that nothing has
ever
benefitted from its existence


Nothing *has* ever benefited from existence. Proved.

It's not trickery,


* * Trying to get people to incorrectly believe life is not a benefit when it
is, is a trick that


It's not a trick.

Life is not a benefit. Trying to get people incorrectly to believe
that life is a benefit, when it has been shown conclusively that it
cannot be, is bullshit.


the LoL is verbal trickery and my logic demonstrates it.


* * You have never been able to show how


He has.
  #14 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 10-03-2011, 11:10 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,258
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against EatingMeat

On 3/10/2011 3:48 PM, [email protected] wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:32:44 -0800, wrote:


Life can and often does have positive value for animals,


Meaningless blabber.



Both of the animals in the theoretical example above had "life" in exactly
the same measure and manner, yet one suffered while the other thrived. That
PROVES that "life" is not the source of benefit.


It's a benefit which makes all others possible,


*Wrong*. It's a condition that is required for any benefit, but it is
not, itself, a benefit.
  #15 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-03-2011, 11:27 PM posted to soc.culture.indian,alt.food.vegan,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,258
Default Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against EatingMeat

****wit David Harrison, criminal breeder of fighting roosters, lied:


[email protected] wrote
*No* animals benefit by existing

Many appear to,


No.



I didn't mean that animal living conditions don't matter to me, I mean that
for the purpose of this example it doesn't matter what the reason is for the
suffering,


Yes it does.


No, it does not, homo ****wit.



the animals in the hypothetical are suffering, that's stipulated.


The opinion of an eliminationist


Ha ha ha ha ha!



anything, sleeping on cold concrete or slats.

IMO they should be provided with something better, but it's hard to
provide
pigs with something they won't make a huge mess of. When it's all they
ever
know, I'm not convinced concrete floors make life of negative value for
pigs.


Bullshit,


If they never know anything different,


It's not out of consideration for porcupines
that we don't raise them for food. It's because
they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
either, but because they're fairly easy to
raise.
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005

I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
that all of the animals I eat had terrible
lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
because I don't care about them at all, but I
would just ignore their suffering.
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999

I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
also....
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999

I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
to make the effort.
Goo/****wit David Harrison - July 31, 2003


pigs are clean animals, if given the opportunity they will always
keep their bedding and mess areas separate.


That doesn't stop them from making a mess,


It's not out of consideration for porcupines
that we don't raise them for food. It's because
they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
either, but because they're fairly easy to
raise.
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005

I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
that all of the animals I eat had terrible
lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
because I don't care about them at all, but I
would just ignore their suffering.
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999

I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
also....
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999

I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
to make the effort.
Goo/****wit David Harrison - July 31, 2003


But again, this is not relevant
to my point.


It's all relevant.


It's irrelevant.




and deprivation

From what?

Light, space, access to earth, whatever, it's unimportant what from, it's
theoretical.

We'll just forget that one since the concrete was covered above. Life
still
seems like it may have positive value to Salatin.


Sigh, you are obviously missing the point.


No, I asked you for


You bullshitted, attempting to spike the conversation.

You are deliberately ignoring the point.



It's a benefit which makes all others possible


Calling it a benefit is begging the question, I have shown that it isn't, as
have others.


You have simply claimed that it's not without being able to even attempt to
explain what you want people to believe prevents it from being one.


It has been well and thoroughly explained why it isn't one: it doesn't
meet the definition.




It's not trickery,

Trying to get people to incorrectly believe life is not a benefit when


Life is not a benefit - proved.



Life cannot be called a benefit,


It certainly can until


It is not a benefit. Calling it one is lying.



Sure I have, the "consideration" you are advocating is cheap sophistry,


That's just a lie the same as


It is not a lie. Your *FAKE* "consideration" - which you don't even
attempt to show - is sophistry.


not
real "consideration" that helps animals. and the proof of that is that your
"consideration" has never helped a single animal, never will, and cannot.


In contrast to that lie


Not a lie - you show no legitimate consideration for animals at all.

It's not out of consideration for porcupines
that we don't raise them for food. It's because
they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
either, but because they're fairly easy to
raise.
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005

I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
that all of the animals I eat had terrible
lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
because I don't care about them at all, but I
would just ignore their suffering.
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999

I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
also....
Goo/****wit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999

I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
to make the effort.
Goo/****wit David Harrison - July 31, 2003


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
Hindu Ethics - 5 Reasons to be a vegetarian and 10 arguments against eating meat Dr. Jai Maharaj[_2_] Vegan 0 15-06-2015 05:54 PM
Hindu Ethics - Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian & Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat Dr. Jai Maharaj[_1_] Vegan 0 31-12-2011 05:56 AM
Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat [email protected] Vegan 12 01-03-2011 10:02 PM
Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat Tim923[_2_] Vegan 3 28-02-2011 01:58 AM
Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat The Undead Edward M. Kennedy Vegan 0 23-02-2011 09:33 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"

 

Copyright © 2017