Ron wrote:
> In article t>,
> Jay Santos > wrote:
>
> > Ron wrote:
> >
> > > In article t>,
> > > Jay Santos > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>Ron wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>In article t>,
> > >>> Jay Santos > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>Ron wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>In article
. net>,
> > >>>>>Jay Santos > wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>Sophomore Ron wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>In article
.net>,
> > >>>>>>>Jay Santos > wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Sophomore Ron wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>In article
et>,
> > >>>>>>>>>Jay Santos > wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>Sophomore Ron wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>That you equate veganism and forced sexual violence
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>I asked you to respond with a yes or a no, sophomoric
> > >>>>>>>>>>shitbag. "Yes or no, Sophomore Ron - dispense with
> > >>>>>>>>>>your usual blowhard windy equivocation."
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>Answer the question, Sophomore Ron, and answer it with
> > >>>>>>>>>>a yes or a no: Do you believe sodomizing small
> > >>>>>>>>>>children with broom handles to be morally wrong? Yes
> > >>>>>>>>>>or no, shitbag; no one is interested in your sophistry.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>Do you?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Answer the question, shitbag. Do you believe
> > >>>>>>>>sodomizing small children with broom handles to be
> > >>>>>>>>morally wrong?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Answer yes or no, shitbag. No one is interested in
> > >>>>>>>>reading yet more of your trite sophistry.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>We both must think it okay.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>No, don't speak for me, cocksucker.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>Anyway, I'll take that as a "Yes, cocksucker Ron
> > >>>>>>believe it to be morally wrong for adults to sodomize
> > >>>>>>children", although given your sexual orientation, I'm
> > >>>>>>not sure I believe you. Anyway, what took you so long
> > >>>>>>to answer, cocksucker?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>Since we have time to discuss anything here.
> > >>>>>>>Since neither of us is championing the poor broomed
children, we must
> > >>>>>>>not view it as objectively or absolutely wrong.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>****wit - I'm not talking about what others might do to
> > >>>>>>stop psychopath degenerates like you from sodomizing
> > >>>>>>children. That isn't the issue, and my belief that it
> > >>>>>>is absolutely wrong does not compel me to try to stop
> > >>>>>>you from doing it. It DOES allow me to declare you
> > >>>>>>evil for doing it.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>The point in asking the question, cocksucker, is to get
> > >>>>>>Skanky Carpetmuncher and you to see that if YOU believe
> > >>>>>>it is absolutely wrong, then YOU must not do it at all.
> > >>>>>>It isn't about me preventing you from doing
> > >>>>>>something, cocksucker; it's about YOU recognizing what
> > >>>>>>your belief in moral absolutes necessarily dictates to
> > >>>>>>YOU about YOUR behavior.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>You don't have the power to stop me from doing anything.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>That's probably false, but beside the point. It isn't
> > >>>>my personal and direct obligation to stop you from
> > >>>>committing evil acts.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Nor is it the vegan's responsibility to stop others from killing
animals
> > >>>-- if we accept your reasoning.
> > >>
> > >>I never suggested it was, homo. I said it is the
> > >>"vegan's" responsibility not to participate in the
> > >>process, in any way, that leads to killing animals.
> > >>Buying from a producer who you know kills animals is
> > >>participating. You can't believe the killing of
> > >>animals is wrong and participate in the process.
> > >
> > >
> > > Of course, she can.
> >
> > No, she can't. To participate means one doesn't really
> > believe it's wrong.
>
> I clearly articulated the difficulty with this position

No, you didn't demonstrate any difficulty at all with the position,
Brucie. Run along now.