On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:08:33 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:

>It has been pointed out to me that Mr Bell

Ted Bell is Jonathan Ball, and you know it. When I included
Jonathan's post (below) on this issue and mentioned that he
was the author of it while posting under the name Ted Bell,
you conceded it was Jon by writing, " I may discuss it with
*him* at some point."

[Jonathan's statement]
> "The wish to avoid or reduce personal culpability actually leads some
> "vegans" and omnivores alike to view animal deaths, incorrectly, as
> divisible. Many on both sides subscribe to a bizarre and erroneous
> belief that one can be responsible for some discrete fraction of an
> animal death. Somewhat surprisingly, the argument seems to be found
> more commonly among omnivores, most often when they talk about
> the number of meals that may be had from the meat from one large
> animal; they'll talk about a "fraction of a death" attributable to one
> hamburger, for example.
>
> The animal deaths are indivisible. If the food production that caused the
> 1000 collateral deaths yielded food to feed 100,000 people (that would be
> some yield!), the eaters cannot say that they only "caused" 1/100th of a
> death. They all, collectively, are responsible for all 1000 deaths.
> Similarly, if a dressed steer carcass yields 250 pounds of edible beef,
> and those are made into 500 half-pound servings, those who eat them
> cannot say they only "caused" 1/500th of a death; they ALL caused one
> full death, together.
>
> The point is to compare the total numbers. One *could* eat a fish,
> causing one animal death; or one could eat a serving of rice that came
> from a particular crop whose cultivation and harvest caused 1000 deaths.
> The rice eater caused 1000 deaths."
> Jonathan Ball as Ted Bell http://tinyurl.com/4blce
[Dutch]
I didn't argue the point because I didn't read it. I may discuss it with
*him* at some point. *my emphasis*
[end] http://tinyurl.com/5ej7h

Stop lying, Dutch; you know Ted Bell is Jonathan Ball.

>and I have presented what appears
>to be differing opinions on the issue of divisibility of responsibility for
>animal deaths. I contend that closer examination will reveal that we
>actually are just looking at it from different standpoints.
>
>Mr Bell rightly commented that if you eat a hamburger, from a moral and
>ethical point of view you are 100% culpable for the death of the steer that
>the meat came from. It's the "Orient Express" principle.
>
>I commented that when I eat a 6 oz moose steak from a 1500 lb moose carcass
>I am responsible for 1/3000 of a death.

Which makes you exactly the type of meatarian Jon was referring
to when writing;

"The wish to avoid or reduce personal culpability actually leads some
"vegans" and omnivores alike to view animal deaths, incorrectly, as
divisible. Many on both sides subscribe to a bizarre and erroneous
belief that one can be responsible for some discrete fraction of an
animal death.
.......
The animal deaths are indivisible. If the food production that caused the
1000 collateral deaths yielded food to feed 100,000 people (that would be
some yield!), the eaters cannot say that they only "caused" 1/100th of a
death. They all, collectively, are responsible for all 1000 deaths.
Similarly, if a dressed steer carcass yields 250 pounds of edible beef,
and those are made into 500 half-pound servings, those who eat them
cannot say they only "caused" 1/500th of a death; they ALL caused one
full death, together."

Why do you try to avoid or reduce personal culpability for the deaths
of the animals you eat by making those deaths divisible, Ditch? You're
fully responsible for them, and making those deaths divisible to reduce
your personal responsibility for them won't fool anyone.

"Reynard" > wrote
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:08:33 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> >It has been pointed out to me that Mr Bell

> Stop lying, Dutch; you know Ted Bell is Jonathan Ball.

It is of no consequence who Mr Bell is.

"Reynard" > wrote
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:08:33 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> >It has been pointed out to me that Mr Bell

> Stop lying, Dutch; you know Ted Bell is Jonathan Ball.

It is of no consequence who Mr Bell is.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:30:58 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
>"Reynard" > wrote
>> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:08:33 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>
>> >It has been pointed out to me that Mr Bell
>
>> Stop lying, Dutch; you know Ted Bell is Jonathan Ball.
>
>It is of no consequence who Mr Bell is.

He is the Gonad, who pretends to be:

Jonathan Ball
Citizen
Benfez
Wilson Woods
Radical Moderate
Bingo
Edward
George
Bill
Fred
Mystery Poster
Merlin the dog
Bob the dog

elvira
Dieter
"Dieter "
>
Abner Hale
Roger Whitaker
****tard
Apoo
Ted Bell

Jay Santos

and whoever else.................

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:30:58 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
>"Reynard" > wrote
>> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:08:33 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>
>> >It has been pointed out to me that Mr Bell
>
>> Stop lying, Dutch; you know Ted Bell is Jonathan Ball.
>
>It is of no consequence who Mr Bell is.

He is the Gonad, who pretends to be:

Jonathan Ball
Citizen
Benfez
Wilson Woods
Radical Moderate
Bingo
Edward
George
Bill
Fred
Mystery Poster
Merlin the dog
Bob the dog

elvira
Dieter
"Dieter "
>
Abner Hale
Roger Whitaker
****tard
Apoo
Ted Bell

Jay Santos

and whoever else.................

> wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:30:58 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Reynard" > wrote
> >> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:08:33 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >>
> >> >It has been pointed out to me that Mr Bell
> >
> >> Stop lying, Dutch; you know Ted Bell is Jonathan Ball.
> >
> >It is of no consequence who Mr Bell is.
>
> He is the Gonad

I am not aquainted with that person.

> wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:30:58 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Reynard" > wrote
> >> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:08:33 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >>
> >> >It has been pointed out to me that Mr Bell
> >
> >> Stop lying, Dutch; you know Ted Bell is Jonathan Ball.
> >
> >It is of no consequence who Mr Bell is.
>
> He is the Gonad

I am not aquainted with that person.