In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Reynard" > wrote
> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
>
> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that their diets
> are not bloodless.

Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
logical rationalization.

I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am. They can live
their daily lives without having to kill.

"Ron" > wrote

> "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Reynard" > wrote
>> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
>> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
>>
>> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that their
>> diets
>> are not bloodless.
>
> Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
> degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
> logical rationalization.

If it's illogical then why are people who hire killers sent to prison?

> I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
> ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am. They can live
> their daily lives without having to kill.

Who or what will you kill today?

In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote
>
> > "Dutch" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Reynard" > wrote
> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
> >>
> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that their
> >> diets
> >> are not bloodless.
> >
> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
> > logical rationalization.
>
> If it's illogical then why are people who hire killers sent to prison?

I see. It's in the law so it must be logical. Humans craft laws. Humans
are often times illogical. Ergo, it is possible to find instances of
illogic in the law.

Dutch, are you going to claim that the law conforms to logic?

> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am. They can live
> > their daily lives without having to kill.
>
> Who or what will you kill today?

I don't need to kill. There are plenty of others who willingly take on
that role for me. Why should I deny them the pleasure and the profit
that they obviously enjoy. While some laws, protect some animals and in
some situations (not so logical) animals lack legal rights (read
protections and punishments) as you and I do. As a result, livestock
(animals herded for mass killings at some point) get to fill that nature
in humans who get off on killing helpless and defenseless animals.

Personally, I'd rather have those individuals killing non-human animals
rather than humans, so I indulge them and do nothing to change the laws.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote
>>
>> > "Dutch" >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Reynard" > wrote
>> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
>> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
>> >>
>> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that their
>> >> diets
>> >> are not bloodless.
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
>> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
>> > logical rationalization.
>>
>> If it's illogical then why are people who hire killers sent to prison?
>
> I see. It's in the law so it must be logical. Humans craft laws. Humans
> are often times illogical. Ergo, it is possible to find instances of
> illogic in the law.
>
> Dutch, are you going to claim that the law conforms to logic?

Quit dodging and answer the question. Should we be able to hire murderers
with impunity?

>> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
>> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am. They can live
>> > their daily lives without having to kill.
>>
>> Who or what will you kill today?
>
> I don't need to kill. There are plenty of others who willingly take on
> that role for me.

Exactly, just like vegans. Thanks for illustrating my point

[..]

In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Ron" > wrote
> >>
> >> > "Dutch" >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "Reynard" > wrote
> >> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
> >> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
> >> >>
> >> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that their
> >> >> diets
> >> >> are not bloodless.
> >> >
> >> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
> >> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
> >> > logical rationalization.
> >>
> >> If it's illogical then why are people who hire killers sent to prison?
> >
> > I see. It's in the law so it must be logical. Humans craft laws. Humans
> > are often times illogical. Ergo, it is possible to find instances of
> > illogic in the law.
> >
> > Dutch, are you going to claim that the law conforms to logic?
>
> Quit dodging and answer the question. Should we be able to hire murderers
> with impunity?

Of course, we can and do and the answer is yes. That some idiot is
prepared to kill another on the promise of few pennies is just an excuse
for their original desire anyway.

Soldiers are hired killers. We justify their actions and so do they.
Executioners in states with death penalties are hired killers. Some
people argue doctors are killers in that abortion is killing and those
are paid acts. The US is currently invovled in war, many people are
being hired for those killings.

Now, don't dodge my question. Are you going to claim that the law is an
example of logic. I just provided several examples where the law DOES
allow for the hiring of killers.

> >> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
> >> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am. They can live
> >> > their daily lives without having to kill.
> >>
> >> Who or what will you kill today?
> >
> > I don't need to kill. There are plenty of others who willingly take on
> > that role for me.
>
> Exactly, just like vegans. Thanks for illustrating my point

Once again, you hold others (the vegan) responsible for what others (the
killers and farmers) do. I find passing responsibility is a consistent
position for the vegan hater. The vegan is certainly better than me that
they will choose to avoid harming an animal, but then I have my reasons
to see that harm to animals continue to avoid harm to others.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article >, "Dutch" >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Ron" > wrote
>> >>
>> >> > "Dutch" >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> "Reynard" > wrote
>> >> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
>> >> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that
>> >> >> their
>> >> >> diets
>> >> >> are not bloodless.
>> >> >
>> >> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
>> >> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
>> >> > logical rationalization.
>> >>
>> >> If it's illogical then why are people who hire killers sent to prison?
>> >
>> > I see. It's in the law so it must be logical. Humans craft laws. Humans
>> > are often times illogical. Ergo, it is possible to find instances of
>> > illogic in the law.
>> >
>> > Dutch, are you going to claim that the law conforms to logic?
>>
>> Quit dodging and answer the question. Should we be able to hire murderers
>> with impunity?
>
> Of course, we can and do and the answer is yes. That some idiot is
> prepared to kill another on the promise of few pennies is just an excuse
> for their original desire anyway.
>
> Soldiers are hired killers. We justify their actions and so do they.
> Executioners in states with death penalties are hired killers. Some
> people argue doctors are killers in that abortion is killing and those
> are paid acts. The US is currently invovled in war, many people are
> being hired for those killings.
>
> Now, don't dodge my question. Are you going to claim that the law is an
> example of logic. I just provided several examples where the law DOES
> allow for the hiring of killers.
>
>> >> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
>> >> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am. They can live
>> >> > their daily lives without having to kill.
>> >>
>> >> Who or what will you kill today?
>> >
>> > I don't need to kill. There are plenty of others who willingly take on
>> > that role for me.
>>
>> Exactly, just like vegans. Thanks for illustrating my point
>
> Once again, you hold others (the vegan) responsible for what others (the
> killers and farmers) do. I find passing responsibility is a consistent
> position for the vegan hater.
===========================
I find your ignorance to be far more consistant, fool. In the cases you
try to use above, you fail miserably. Why? Because those are actions we
are responsible for. We pay for them, we back them. We aren't claiming one
thing, and then doing another. That is the difference between us and
vegans. They claim that their *actions* result in either no death of animsl
or ferwer. Both are false. Vegnas have achoice of actions to take. The
ones here on usenet invariably take the selfish, easy, conveninet route.
They take actions that they *know* results in the death and suffering of
animals, despite their claim of living a life that causes none/less/fewer.
So, you can continue your troll now, knowing that your ignorance is well
known, fool.



The vegan is certainly better than me that
> they will choose to avoid harming an animal, but then I have my reasons
> to see that harm to animals continue to avoid harm to others.
==============
Ignorance on display....

In article . net>,
"rick etter" > wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Ron" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "Ron" > wrote
> >> >>
> >> >> > "Dutch" >
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> "Reynard" > wrote
> >> >> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
> >> >> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that
> >> >> >> their
> >> >> >> diets
> >> >> >> are not bloodless.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
> >> >> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
> >> >> > logical rationalization.
> >> >>
> >> >> If it's illogical then why are people who hire killers sent to prison?
> >> >
> >> > I see. It's in the law so it must be logical. Humans craft laws. Humans
> >> > are often times illogical. Ergo, it is possible to find instances of
> >> > illogic in the law.
> >> >
> >> > Dutch, are you going to claim that the law conforms to logic?
> >>
> >> Quit dodging and answer the question. Should we be able to hire murderers
> >> with impunity?
> >
> > Of course, we can and do and the answer is yes. That some idiot is
> > prepared to kill another on the promise of few pennies is just an excuse
> > for their original desire anyway.
> >
> > Soldiers are hired killers. We justify their actions and so do they.
> > Executioners in states with death penalties are hired killers. Some
> > people argue doctors are killers in that abortion is killing and those
> > are paid acts. The US is currently invovled in war, many people are
> > being hired for those killings.
> >
> > Now, don't dodge my question. Are you going to claim that the law is an
> > example of logic. I just provided several examples where the law DOES
> > allow for the hiring of killers.
> >
> >> >> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
> >> >> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am. They can live
> >> >> > their daily lives without having to kill.
> >> >>
> >> >> Who or what will you kill today?
> >> >
> >> > I don't need to kill. There are plenty of others who willingly take on
> >> > that role for me.
> >>
> >> Exactly, just like vegans. Thanks for illustrating my point
> >
> > Once again, you hold others (the vegan) responsible for what others (the
> > killers and farmers) do. I find passing responsibility is a consistent
> > position for the vegan hater.
> ===========================
> I find your ignorance to be far more consistant, fool. In the cases you
> try to use above, you fail miserably. Why? Because those are actions we
> are responsible for. We pay for them, we back them. We aren't claiming one
> thing, and then doing another. That is the difference between us and
> vegans. They claim that their *actions* result in either no death of animsl
> or ferwer. Both are false. Vegnas have achoice of actions to take. The
> ones here on usenet invariably take the selfish, easy, conveninet route.
> They take actions that they *know* results in the death and suffering of
> animals, despite their claim of living a life that causes none/less/fewer.
> So, you can continue your troll now, knowing that your ignorance is well
> known, fool.

I'm more than a little concerned about your desire to take
responsibility for the actions of others. Feel free to blame yourself
for what bloodthirsty people do, but personally, I know that I am
responsible for my actions only. Unlike those who raise and kill animals
en masse, I have the ability to control my behaviour and my emotions --
they don't. To blame myself for their actions is just foolishness.

People who inflict pain and suffering on animals for fun, food and
profit do so because they get their rocks off doing it. I allow it to
happen to save myself and the community from that type of mental
illness. It is a choice and I also leave responsibility where it
belongs. Their violence is their problem.

"Ron" > wrote
> "Dutch" > wrote:
[..]

>> Quit dodging and answer the question. Should we be able to hire murderers
>> with impunity?
>
> Of course, we can and do and the answer is yes. That some idiot is
> prepared to kill another on the promise of few pennies is just an excuse
> for their original desire anyway.

So a smart and moral thing to do in Rons' World if you get fed up with an
annoying spouse, child or in-law would be to simply hire someone to bump
them off, with impunity. Pretty scary world.

> Soldiers are hired killers. We justify their actions and so do they.
> Executioners in states with death penalties are hired killers. Some
> people argue doctors are killers in that abortion is killing and those
> are paid acts. The US is currently invovled in war, many people are
> being hired for those killings.

None of those exceptional circumstances gives us the right to have any
person killed we choose to kill.

> Now, don't dodge my question. Are you going to claim that the law is an
> example of logic.

Yes it is. If it is considered immoral to hire killers, then it is logical
to make it illegal.

> I just provided several examples where the law DOES
> allow for the hiring of killers.

Neither exceptions nor violations invalidate a moral rule. Morality is not
mathematics, it's a social construct that is used to modify behaviour.

>> >> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
>> >> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am. They can live
>> >> > their daily lives without having to kill.
>> >>
>> >> Who or what will you kill today?
>> >
>> > I don't need to kill. There are plenty of others who willingly take on
>> > that role for me.
>>
>> Exactly, just like vegans. Thanks for illustrating my point
>
> Once again, you hold others (the vegan) responsible for what others (the
> killers and farmers) do. I find passing responsibility is a consistent
> position for the vegan hater. The vegan is certainly better than me that
> they will choose to avoid harming an animal, but then I have my reasons
> to see that harm to animals continue to avoid harm to others.

According to your logic neither you nor the vegan is responsible for what
others do, and since neither of you is killing any animals, how do you
conclude that the vegan is better than you?

In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote
> > "Dutch" > wrote:
> [..]
>
> >> Quit dodging and answer the question. Should we be able to hire murderers
> >> with impunity?
> >
> > Of course, we can and do and the answer is yes. That some idiot is
> > prepared to kill another on the promise of few pennies is just an excuse
> > for their original desire anyway.
>
> So a smart and moral thing to do in Rons' World if you get fed up with an
> annoying spouse, child or in-law would be to simply hire someone to bump
> them off, with impunity. Pretty scary world.

Nope, just the killer goes to prison. Once again, Dutch is relying on a
very inconsistent legal system as grounds for a logical argument.

> > Soldiers are hired killers. We justify their actions and so do they.
> > Executioners in states with death penalties are hired killers. Some
> > people argue doctors are killers in that abortion is killing and those
> > are paid acts. The US is currently invovled in war, many people are
> > being hired for those killings.
>
> None of those exceptional circumstances gives us the right to have any
> person killed we choose to kill.

I can't make you do anything that you haven't made a choice to do.
Blaming others is just convenient.

> > Now, don't dodge my question. Are you going to claim that the law is an
> > example of logic.
>
> Yes it is. If it is considered immoral to hire killers, then it is logical
> to make it illegal.

I don't consider it immoral, so you are wrong. It is illegal. Anyone
idiot willing to kill for a handful of cash is foolish and ought to be
penalized for their actions. Blaming others is irrelevant to the action.

> > I just provided several examples where the law DOES
> > allow for the hiring of killers.
>
> Neither exceptions nor violations invalidate a moral rule. Morality is not
> mathematics, it's a social construct that is used to modify behaviour.

LOL. Yes, it does. Clearly, hiring killers is legal and therefore moral
in many circumstances. As we discussed, using the logically
inconsistency of law as a basis for morality or logic is just flawed.

Frankly, hire as many hit men as you see fit. The one who I choose to
see penalized is the one who pulls the trigger. They are the ones who
are responsible. But feel better in a frightening world with such laws.
A law against hiring a killer doesn't stop anyone from doing anything --
it's a feel good proposition for people who feel afraid and vulnerable.

> >> >> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
> >> >> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am. They can live
> >> >> > their daily lives without having to kill.
> >> >>
> >> >> Who or what will you kill today?
> >> >
> >> > I don't need to kill. There are plenty of others who willingly take on
> >> > that role for me.
> >>
> >> Exactly, just like vegans. Thanks for illustrating my point
> >
> > Once again, you hold others (the vegan) responsible for what others (the
> > killers and farmers) do. I find passing responsibility is a consistent
> > position for the vegan hater. The vegan is certainly better than me that
> > they will choose to avoid harming an animal, but then I have my reasons
> > to see that harm to animals continue to avoid harm to others.
>
> According to your logic neither you nor the vegan is responsible for what
> others do, and since neither of you is killing any animals, how do you
> conclude that the vegan is better than you?

The vegan isn't willing to see an animal suffer for a human to live. I
am. I'd say they are quite right to take the "moral high ground". On
further reflection, I am similar to the vegan, we just have different
approaches to resolving the same problem of human aggression and
violence.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article >, "Dutch" >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Ron" > wrote
>> >>
>> >> > "Dutch" >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> "Reynard" > wrote
>> >> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
>> >> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that
>> >> >> their
>> >> >> diets
>> >> >> are not bloodless.
>> >> >
>> >> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
>> >> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
>> >> > logical rationalization.
>> >>
>> >> If it's illogical then why are people who hire killers sent to prison?
>> >
>> > I see. It's in the law so it must be logical. Humans craft laws. Humans
>> > are often times illogical. Ergo, it is possible to find instances of
>> > illogic in the law.
>> >
>> > Dutch, are you going to claim that the law conforms to logic?
>>
>> Quit dodging and answer the question. Should we be able to hire murderers
>> with impunity?
>
> Of course, we can and do and the answer is yes. That some idiot is
> prepared to kill another on the promise of few pennies is just an excuse
> for their original desire anyway.
>
> Soldiers are hired killers. We justify their actions and so do they.
> Executioners in states with death penalties are hired killers. Some
> people argue doctors are killers in that abortion is killing and those
> are paid acts. The US is currently invovled in war, many people are
> being hired for those killings.
>
> Now, don't dodge my question. Are you going to claim that the law is an
> example of logic. I just provided several examples where the law DOES
> allow for the hiring of killers.
>
>> >> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
>> >> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am. They can live
>> >> > their daily lives without having to kill.
>> >>
>> >> Who or what will you kill today?
>> >
>> > I don't need to kill. There are plenty of others who willingly take on
>> > that role for me.
>>
>> Exactly, just like vegans. Thanks for illustrating my point
>
> Once again, you hold others (the vegan) responsible for what others (the
> killers and farmers) do. I find passing responsibility is a consistent
> position for the vegan hater.
===========================
I find your ignorance to be far more consistant, fool. In the cases you
try to use above, you fail miserably. Why? Because those are actions we
are responsible for. We pay for them, we back them. We aren't claiming one
thing, and then doing another. That is the difference between us and
vegans. They claim that their *actions* result in either no death of animsl
or ferwer. Both are false. Vegnas have achoice of actions to take. The
ones here on usenet invariably take the selfish, easy, conveninet route.
They take actions that they *know* results in the death and suffering of
animals, despite their claim of living a life that causes none/less/fewer.
So, you can continue your troll now, knowing that your ignorance is well
known, fool.



The vegan is certainly better than me that
> they will choose to avoid harming an animal, but then I have my reasons
> to see that harm to animals continue to avoid harm to others.
==============
Ignorance on display....

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Reynard" > wrote
>> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
>> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
>>
>> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that their
>> diets
>> are not bloodless.
>
> Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
> degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
> logical rationalization.
=====================
No, it defies your retardation, idiot. That you can't understand that any
action that you take, that you know causes the exact result you claim to be
avoiding and makes you culpable, is quite amusing.

>
> I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
> ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am.
================
LOL ANy body is, fool


They can live
> their daily lives without having to kill.
==================
What have you or I killed today? Personally I don't kill anything myself,
so I guess to you I'm just as pure as a vegan, eh dolt?

In article . net>,
"rick etter" > wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Reynard" > wrote
> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
> >>
> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that their
> >> diets
> >> are not bloodless.
> >
> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
> > logical rationalization.
> =====================
> No, it defies your retardation, idiot. That you can't understand that any
> action that you take, that you know causes the exact result you claim to be
> avoiding and makes you culpable, is quite amusing.

I stated my culpability. I am participating in allowing killers to kill
animals to provide safety and security to those who must live in
proximity to people who are thrive on bloodlust and the infliction of
pain, suffering and death. Like paedophilia, there is no known cure for
individuals who delight in the killing of animals. I choose it as a
'lesser of two evils'. I am fully aware of what I do and why I do it.

I eat meat several days each week to ensure that there is an ample
requirement for meat products as the meat killers are unwilling to
accept responsibility for their actions against animals. Like most
treatment and cure, until they can respond to their denial I must
moderate my choices. Since, I do know they are unwilling to accept
responsibility, I make my choices.

> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am.
> ================
> LOL ANy body is, fool

Have you considered raising livestock? Your level of aggression that you
display towards humans might be better served killing animals.

> They can live
> > their daily lives without having to kill.
> ==================
> What have you or I killed today? Personally I don't kill anything myself,
> so I guess to you I'm just as pure as a vegan, eh dolt?

That would be correct. You and I are only responsible for our actions.
Neither of us killed anything today and neither did any vegan that I've
spoken with tody.

If you "feel" guilty, I suspect that is your difficulty and has nothing
to do with the fact that neither of killed an animal today.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article . net>,
> "rick etter" > wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article >, "Dutch" >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Reynard" > wrote
>> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
>> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
>> >>
>> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that their
>> >> diets
>> >> are not bloodless.
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
>> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
>> > logical rationalization.
>> =====================
>> No, it defies your retardation, idiot. That you can't understand that
>> any
>> action that you take, that you know causes the exact result you claim to
>> be
>> avoiding and makes you culpable, is quite amusing.
>
> I stated my culpability. I am participating in allowing killers to kill
> animals to provide safety and security to those who must live in
> proximity to people who are thrive on bloodlust and the infliction of
> pain, suffering and death. Like paedophilia, there is no known cure for
> individuals who delight in the killing of animals. I choose it as a
> 'lesser of two evils'. I am fully aware of what I do and why I do it.
>
> I eat meat several days each week to ensure that there is an ample
> requirement for meat products as the meat killers are unwilling to
> accept responsibility for their actions against animals. Like most
> treatment and cure, until they can respond to their denial I must
> moderate my choices. Since, I do know they are unwilling to accept
> responsibility, I make my choices.
================
Total lack of intellegent response noted. Total display of ignorance
shown, yet again. Tell us again how yyou have determined that vegan food
producers have all somehow become physco-paths, mr freud.


>
>> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
>> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am.
>> ================
>> LOL ANy body is, fool
>
> Have you considered raising livestock? Your level of aggression that you
> display towards humans might be better served killing animals.
=====================
Really? What animals are rasised for food for vegans, idiot?


>
>> They can live
>> > their daily lives without having to kill.
>> ==================
>> What have you or I killed today? Personally I don't kill anything
>> myself,
>> so I guess to you I'm just as pure as a vegan, eh dolt?
>
> That would be correct. You and I are only responsible for our actions.
> Neither of us killed anything today and neither did any vegan that I've
> spoken with tody.
=====================
Yes, we are responsible for our actions. That your are trying to weasel
your way out still doesn't work, fool. You knowing take actionas that
result in animal deaths, you are culpable.


>
> If you "feel" guilty, I suspect that is your difficulty and has nothing
> to do with the fact that neither of killed an animal today.
======================
And it still doesn't absolve either of us from the fact that animals died as
a direct result of our *actions*. Kepp up the good work displaying your
ignorance, pansy-boy.

In article . net>,
"rick etter" > wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article . net>,
> > "rick etter" > wrote:
> >
> >> "Ron" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "Reynard" > wrote
> >> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
> >> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
> >> >>
> >> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that their
> >> >> diets
> >> >> are not bloodless.
> >> >
> >> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
> >> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
> >> > logical rationalization.
> >> =====================
> >> No, it defies your retardation, idiot. That you can't understand that
> >> any
> >> action that you take, that you know causes the exact result you claim to
> >> be
> >> avoiding and makes you culpable, is quite amusing.
> >
> > I stated my culpability. I am participating in allowing killers to kill
> > animals to provide safety and security to those who must live in
> > proximity to people who are thrive on bloodlust and the infliction of
> > pain, suffering and death. Like paedophilia, there is no known cure for
> > individuals who delight in the killing of animals. I choose it as a
> > 'lesser of two evils'. I am fully aware of what I do and why I do it.
> >
> > I eat meat several days each week to ensure that there is an ample
> > requirement for meat products as the meat killers are unwilling to
> > accept responsibility for their actions against animals. Like most
> > treatment and cure, until they can respond to their denial I must
> > moderate my choices. Since, I do know they are unwilling to accept
> > responsibility, I make my choices.
> ================
> Total lack of intellegent response noted. Total display of ignorance
> shown, yet again. Tell us again how yyou have determined that vegan food
> producers have all somehow become physco-paths, mr freud.

Vegan food producers are rarely involved in killing. Food producers
(meat eating) producing food for vegans can and are involved in the
killing of animals. Killing animals en masse to grow a few fields is the
act of someone who is quite fine with killing. Now would you like to
mention a few vegan farmers who are producing. Or will you continue to
make generalizations out of desperation.

Psychopaths? Well, I'm relying on your information here. Someone who is
willing to kill rodents, amphibians, birds etc. and en masse isn't
exactly stable in my view. To delight in the destruction of those
animals and to that degree is obviously by someone who doesn't value
animals. Of course, killing amphibians to grow rice isn't really killing
an animal for food now, is it?

> >> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
> >> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am.
> >> ================
> >> LOL ANy body is, fool
> >
> > Have you considered raising livestock? Your level of aggression that you
> > display towards humans might be better served killing animals.
> =====================
> Really? What animals are rasised for food for vegans, idiot?

Do pay attention and stay on track. That you willfully ignore what Dutch
has written to further your opportunities for public abusive behaviour
makes you a prime candidate to raise livestock. I hope there aren't
weaker humans in your presence. Yikes, if a child or weaker individual
might disagree with you and do so in person.

As you can see, violence is the nature of the beast. Some of us are able
to contain our emotions and moderate out actions and others....

> >> They can live
> >> > their daily lives without having to kill.
> >> ==================
> >> What have you or I killed today? Personally I don't kill anything
> >> myself,
> >> so I guess to you I'm just as pure as a vegan, eh dolt?
> >
> > That would be correct. You and I are only responsible for our actions.
> > Neither of us killed anything today and neither did any vegan that I've
> > spoken with tody.
> =====================
> Yes, we are responsible for our actions. That your are trying to weasel
> your way out still doesn't work, fool. You knowing take actionas that
> result in animal deaths, you are culpable.

What actions do I take? I think you might fit into the pathology that I
was mentioning earlier. Walk to store -- nothing dies. Plan menu en
route -- nothing dies. Walk through store -- nothing dies. Buy
ingredients -- nothing dies. Take out money -- nothing dies. Go home --
nothing dies. Eat my meal -- nothing dies.

Please define my actions of killing? What weapon did I use?

> > If you "feel" guilty, I suspect that is your difficulty and has nothing
> > to do with the fact that neither of killed an animal today.
> ======================
> And it still doesn't absolve either of us from the fact that animals died as
> a direct result of our *actions*. Kepp up the good work displaying your
> ignorance, pansy-boy.

As a result of my actions? There you go put forth foolish arguments.
It's like the rapist who claims, "she made me do it". I now control you.
Anything you do is my fault. You are powerless to resist my every whim.
You must respond. You have no will, desire or control over your own
behaviour.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article . net>,
> "rick etter" > wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article . net>,
>> > "rick etter" > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Ron" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > In article >, "Dutch"
>> >> > >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> "Reynard" > wrote
>> >> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
>> >> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that
>> >> >> their
>> >> >> diets
>> >> >> are not bloodless.
>> >> >
>> >> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
>> >> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
>> >> > logical rationalization.
>> >> =====================
>> >> No, it defies your retardation, idiot. That you can't understand that
>> >> any
>> >> action that you take, that you know causes the exact result you claim
>> >> to
>> >> be
>> >> avoiding and makes you culpable, is quite amusing.
>> >
>> > I stated my culpability. I am participating in allowing killers to kill
>> > animals to provide safety and security to those who must live in
>> > proximity to people who are thrive on bloodlust and the infliction of
>> > pain, suffering and death. Like paedophilia, there is no known cure for
>> > individuals who delight in the killing of animals. I choose it as a
>> > 'lesser of two evils'. I am fully aware of what I do and why I do it.
>> >
>> > I eat meat several days each week to ensure that there is an ample
>> > requirement for meat products as the meat killers are unwilling to
>> > accept responsibility for their actions against animals. Like most
>> > treatment and cure, until they can respond to their denial I must
>> > moderate my choices. Since, I do know they are unwilling to accept
>> > responsibility, I make my choices.
>> ================
>> Total lack of intellegent response noted. Total display of ignorance
>> shown, yet again. Tell us again how yyou have determined that vegan
>> food
>> producers have all somehow become physco-paths, mr freud.
>
> Vegan food producers are rarely involved in killing.
=======================
Hey fool, you made the generalization that all food growers are meat-eating
killers on the prowl. Don't blame me for your stupidity, idiot.

Food producers
> (meat eating) producing food for vegans can and are involved in the
> killing of animals. Killing animals en masse to grow a few fields is the
> act of someone who is quite fine with killing.
==========================
Imagine that, same way that vegan growers have to produce their crops....

Now would you like to
> mention a few vegan farmers who are producing. Or will you continue to
> make generalizations out of desperation.
==================
LOL It's you that has been free with the generalization, pansy-boy.

>
> Psychopaths? Well, I'm relying on your information here. Someone who is
> willing to kill rodents, amphibians, birds etc. and en masse isn't
> exactly stable in my view.
=====================
And the person that pays them to do this just so that their food is clean,
cheap, and convenient is?

To delight in the destruction of those
> animals and to that degree is obviously by someone who doesn't value
> animals.
======================
That woyuld be you, fool. You have other choices, yet yiou prefer to cause
that aninmal death and suffering for your selfish reasons. Or, maybe you
just like the idea of all that blood and guts, eh mr freud?


Of course, killing amphibians to grow rice isn't really killing
> an animal for food now, is it?
====================
Really? Why not? The animals is just as dead, and there is now food on
your plate.

>
>> >> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
>> >> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am.
>> >> ================
>> >> LOL ANy body is, fool
>> >
>> > Have you considered raising livestock? Your level of aggression that
>> > you
>> > display towards humans might be better served killing animals.
>> =====================
>> Really? What animals are rasised for food for vegans, idiot?
>
> Do pay attention and stay on track. That you willfully ignore what Dutch
> has written to further your opportunities for public abusive behaviour
> makes you a prime candidate to raise livestock.
==========================
Show me where I responded to a part with dutch ralking about livestock. All
you have is a desire to change the subject suddenly. Why is that pansy-boy?


I hope there aren't
> weaker humans in your presence. Yikes, if a child or weaker individual
> might disagree with you and do so in person.
=======================
And that would be what, mr freud?


>
> As you can see, violence is the nature of the beast. Some of us are able
> to contain our emotions and moderate out actions and others....
=====================
Obviously you can't, because you continue to cause as much animals death and
suffering as you can. Tell us why you like to kill by proxy, mr freud.


>
>> >> They can live
>> >> > their daily lives without having to kill.
>> >> ==================
>> >> What have you or I killed today? Personally I don't kill anything
>> >> myself,
>> >> so I guess to you I'm just as pure as a vegan, eh dolt?
>> >
>> > That would be correct. You and I are only responsible for our actions.
>> > Neither of us killed anything today and neither did any vegan that I've
>> > spoken with tody.
>> =====================
>> Yes, we are responsible for our actions. That your are trying to weasel
>> your way out still doesn't work, fool. You knowing take actionas that
>> result in animal deaths, you are culpable.
>
> What actions do I take? I think you might fit into the pathology that I
> was mentioning earlier. Walk to store -- nothing dies. Plan menu en
> route -- nothing dies. Walk through store -- nothing dies. Buy
> ingredients -- nothing dies. Take out money -- nothing dies. Go home --
> nothing dies. Eat my meal -- nothing dies.
======================
Except that you are brain-dead, fool.


>
> Please define my actions of killing? What weapon did I use?
=================
Your lifestyle, pansy-boy...

>
>> > If you "feel" guilty, I suspect that is your difficulty and has nothing
>> > to do with the fact that neither of killed an animal today.
>> ======================
>> And it still doesn't absolve either of us from the fact that animals died
>> as
>> a direct result of our *actions*. Kepp up the good work displaying your
>> ignorance, pansy-boy.
>
> As a result of my actions? There you go put forth foolish arguments.
> It's like the rapist who claims, "she made me do it". I now control you.
> Anything you do is my fault. You are powerless to resist my every whim.
> You must respond. You have no will, desire or control over your own
> behaviour.
======================
LOL Tell us why, mr freud.

In article . net>,
"rick etter" > wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article . net>,
> > "rick etter" > wrote:
> >
> >> "Ron" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > In article . net>,
> >> > "rick etter" > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "Ron" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > In article >, "Dutch"
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> "Reynard" > wrote
> >> >> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
> >> >> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that
> >> >> >> their
> >> >> >> diets
> >> >> >> are not bloodless.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
> >> >> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
> >> >> > logical rationalization.
> >> >> =====================
> >> >> No, it defies your retardation, idiot. That you can't understand that
> >> >> any
> >> >> action that you take, that you know causes the exact result you claim
> >> >> to
> >> >> be
> >> >> avoiding and makes you culpable, is quite amusing.
> >> >
> >> > I stated my culpability. I am participating in allowing killers to kill
> >> > animals to provide safety and security to those who must live in
> >> > proximity to people who are thrive on bloodlust and the infliction of
> >> > pain, suffering and death. Like paedophilia, there is no known cure for
> >> > individuals who delight in the killing of animals. I choose it as a
> >> > 'lesser of two evils'. I am fully aware of what I do and why I do it.
> >> >
> >> > I eat meat several days each week to ensure that there is an ample
> >> > requirement for meat products as the meat killers are unwilling to
> >> > accept responsibility for their actions against animals. Like most
> >> > treatment and cure, until they can respond to their denial I must
> >> > moderate my choices. Since, I do know they are unwilling to accept
> >> > responsibility, I make my choices.
> >> ================
> >> Total lack of intellegent response noted. Total display of ignorance
> >> shown, yet again. Tell us again how yyou have determined that vegan
> >> food
> >> producers have all somehow become physco-paths, mr freud.
> >
> > Vegan food producers are rarely involved in killing.
> =======================
> Hey fool, you made the generalization that all food growers are meat-eating
> killers on the prowl. Don't blame me for your stupidity, idiot.

Incorrect. I applied Occam's Razor. In a situation where growers may be
meat eater or vegan, what was more likely.

> Food producers
> > (meat eating) producing food for vegans can and are involved in the
> > killing of animals. Killing animals en masse to grow a few fields is the
> > act of someone who is quite fine with killing.
> ==========================
> Imagine that, same way that vegan growers have to produce their crops....

CHOOSE TO. No one has to do anything unless they've chosen to do it. The
vegan CHOOSES to avoid killing animals which they accomplish. The grower
CHOOSES to kill animals such as birds, frogs, etc.

> Now would you like to
> > mention a few vegan farmers who are producing. Or will you continue to
> > make generalizations out of desperation.
> ==================
> LOL It's you that has been free with the generalization, pansy-boy.

I fear for any humans in your presence. This level of aggression is
quite disturbing.

> > Psychopaths? Well, I'm relying on your information here. Someone who is
> > willing to kill rodents, amphibians, birds etc. and en masse isn't
> > exactly stable in my view.
> =====================
> And the person that pays them to do this just so that their food is clean,
> cheap, and convenient is?

.. . not responsible for the choices of others. You are simply another
person who misguidedly assumes because of a few inconsistencies in law
that this theory is logical or moral. Holding a second person
responsible for the actions of another is an oddity in law, not a
consistently applied position.

> To delight in the destruction of those
> > animals and to that degree is obviously by someone who doesn't value
> > animals.
> ======================
> That woyuld be you, fool. You have other choices, yet yiou prefer to cause
> that aninmal death and suffering for your selfish reasons. Or, maybe you
> just like the idea of all that blood and guts, eh mr freud?

Not at all. As I stated, I prefer to see killers killing animals rather
than killing humans. That is the choice that I make. Since people won't
seek help for their aggressive tendencies, I must make a choice.

> Of course, killing amphibians to grow rice isn't really killing
> > an animal for food now, is it?
> ====================
> Really? Why not? The animals is just as dead, and there is now food on
> your plate.

The animal is dead because someone other than me killed it. They are, of
course, powerless to resist. They are powerless, of course, to choose
another occupation than killer of animals, or collateral killer of
animals. They must do my bidding. I command them. I am all powerful. I
demand and the world must respond. Like a pharoah, I pay a pittance and
the rest of the world must respond.

> >> >> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
> >> >> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am.
> >> >> ================
> >> >> LOL ANy body is, fool
> >> >
> >> > Have you considered raising livestock? Your level of aggression that
> >> > you
> >> > display towards humans might be better served killing animals.
> >> =====================
> >> Really? What animals are rasised for food for vegans, idiot?
> >
> > Do pay attention and stay on track. That you willfully ignore what Dutch
> > has written to further your opportunities for public abusive behaviour
> > makes you a prime candidate to raise livestock.
> ==========================
> Show me where I responded to a part with dutch ralking about livestock. All
> you have is a desire to change the subject suddenly. Why is that pansy-boy?

You responded to me where I was responding to Dutch. Please. Feigning
just doesn't suit you.

> I hope there aren't
> > weaker humans in your presence. Yikes, if a child or weaker individual
> > might disagree with you and do so in person.
> =======================
> And that would be what, mr freud?

You've demonstrated that you cannot contain your emotions when I
disagree with you. I question what you are capable of doing to other
humans who may disagree with you, or worse.

> > As you can see, violence is the nature of the beast. Some of us are able
> > to contain our emotions and moderate out actions and others....
> =====================
> Obviously you can't, because you continue to cause as much animals death and
> suffering as you can. Tell us why you like to kill by proxy, mr freud.

As possible? Clearly you know nothing of me, of my daily diet, or eating
habits. As stated, I allow through my inaction those killers to vent
their anger and aggression on animals to save the human community.

> >> >> They can live
> >> >> > their daily lives without having to kill.
> >> >> ==================
> >> >> What have you or I killed today? Personally I don't kill anything
> >> >> myself,
> >> >> so I guess to you I'm just as pure as a vegan, eh dolt?
> >> >
> >> > That would be correct. You and I are only responsible for our actions.
> >> > Neither of us killed anything today and neither did any vegan that I've
> >> > spoken with tody.
> >> =====================
> >> Yes, we are responsible for our actions. That your are trying to weasel
> >> your way out still doesn't work, fool. You knowing take actionas that
> >> result in animal deaths, you are culpable.

You are responsible for my actions? Do tell. This will be interesting.

> > What actions do I take? I think you might fit into the pathology that I
> > was mentioning earlier. Walk to store -- nothing dies. Plan menu en
> > route -- nothing dies. Walk through store -- nothing dies. Buy
> > ingredients -- nothing dies. Take out money -- nothing dies. Go home --
> > nothing dies. Eat my meal -- nothing dies.
> ======================
> Except that you are brain-dead, fool.

Have you considered buying a farm? That aggression is certainly not well
controlled.

> > Please define my actions of killing? What weapon did I use?
> =================
> Your lifestyle, pansy-boy...

More vagueness. I'll leave that as an ability to articulate a cogent
argument in response.

> >> > If you "feel" guilty, I suspect that is your difficulty and has nothing
> >> > to do with the fact that neither of killed an animal today.
> >> ======================
> >> And it still doesn't absolve either of us from the fact that animals died
> >> as
> >> a direct result of our *actions*. Kepp up the good work displaying your
> >> ignorance, pansy-boy.
> >
> > As a result of my actions? There you go put forth foolish arguments.
> > It's like the rapist who claims, "she made me do it". I now control you.
> > Anything you do is my fault. You are powerless to resist my every whim.
> > You must respond. You have no will, desire or control over your own
> > behaviour.
> ======================
> LOL Tell us why, mr freud.

I control the farmers of the world. I only need to want meat and they
all do my bidding. I am all powerful. I only need to think about my
meals for tomorrow and the poor slaves must rush out and kill in a mass
frenzy of blood and guts. I AM powerful. I walk into a grocery store and
people he world over feel an overwhelming compulsion to go out and kill
animals of all kinds. I AM the man.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article . net>,
> "rick etter" > wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article . net>,
>> > "rick etter" > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Ron" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > In article >, "Dutch"
>> >> > >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> "Reynard" > wrote
>> >> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
>> >> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that
>> >> >> their
>> >> >> diets
>> >> >> are not bloodless.
>> >> >
>> >> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
>> >> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
>> >> > logical rationalization.
>> >> =====================
>> >> No, it defies your retardation, idiot. That you can't understand that
>> >> any
>> >> action that you take, that you know causes the exact result you claim
>> >> to
>> >> be
>> >> avoiding and makes you culpable, is quite amusing.
>> >
>> > I stated my culpability. I am participating in allowing killers to kill
>> > animals to provide safety and security to those who must live in
>> > proximity to people who are thrive on bloodlust and the infliction of
>> > pain, suffering and death. Like paedophilia, there is no known cure for
>> > individuals who delight in the killing of animals. I choose it as a
>> > 'lesser of two evils'. I am fully aware of what I do and why I do it.
>> >
>> > I eat meat several days each week to ensure that there is an ample
>> > requirement for meat products as the meat killers are unwilling to
>> > accept responsibility for their actions against animals. Like most
>> > treatment and cure, until they can respond to their denial I must
>> > moderate my choices. Since, I do know they are unwilling to accept
>> > responsibility, I make my choices.
>> ================
>> Total lack of intellegent response noted. Total display of ignorance
>> shown, yet again. Tell us again how yyou have determined that vegan
>> food
>> producers have all somehow become physco-paths, mr freud.
>
> Vegan food producers are rarely involved in killing.
=======================
Hey fool, you made the generalization that all food growers are meat-eating
killers on the prowl. Don't blame me for your stupidity, idiot.

Food producers
> (meat eating) producing food for vegans can and are involved in the
> killing of animals. Killing animals en masse to grow a few fields is the
> act of someone who is quite fine with killing.
==========================
Imagine that, same way that vegan growers have to produce their crops....

Now would you like to
> mention a few vegan farmers who are producing. Or will you continue to
> make generalizations out of desperation.
==================
LOL It's you that has been free with the generalization, pansy-boy.

>
> Psychopaths? Well, I'm relying on your information here. Someone who is
> willing to kill rodents, amphibians, birds etc. and en masse isn't
> exactly stable in my view.
=====================
And the person that pays them to do this just so that their food is clean,
cheap, and convenient is?

To delight in the destruction of those
> animals and to that degree is obviously by someone who doesn't value
> animals.
======================
That woyuld be you, fool. You have other choices, yet yiou prefer to cause
that aninmal death and suffering for your selfish reasons. Or, maybe you
just like the idea of all that blood and guts, eh mr freud?


Of course, killing amphibians to grow rice isn't really killing
> an animal for food now, is it?
====================
Really? Why not? The animals is just as dead, and there is now food on
your plate.

>
>> >> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
>> >> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am.
>> >> ================
>> >> LOL ANy body is, fool
>> >
>> > Have you considered raising livestock? Your level of aggression that
>> > you
>> > display towards humans might be better served killing animals.
>> =====================
>> Really? What animals are rasised for food for vegans, idiot?
>
> Do pay attention and stay on track. That you willfully ignore what Dutch
> has written to further your opportunities for public abusive behaviour
> makes you a prime candidate to raise livestock.
==========================
Show me where I responded to a part with dutch ralking about livestock. All
you have is a desire to change the subject suddenly. Why is that pansy-boy?


I hope there aren't
> weaker humans in your presence. Yikes, if a child or weaker individual
> might disagree with you and do so in person.
=======================
And that would be what, mr freud?


>
> As you can see, violence is the nature of the beast. Some of us are able
> to contain our emotions and moderate out actions and others....
=====================
Obviously you can't, because you continue to cause as much animals death and
suffering as you can. Tell us why you like to kill by proxy, mr freud.


>
>> >> They can live
>> >> > their daily lives without having to kill.
>> >> ==================
>> >> What have you or I killed today? Personally I don't kill anything
>> >> myself,
>> >> so I guess to you I'm just as pure as a vegan, eh dolt?
>> >
>> > That would be correct. You and I are only responsible for our actions.
>> > Neither of us killed anything today and neither did any vegan that I've
>> > spoken with tody.
>> =====================
>> Yes, we are responsible for our actions. That your are trying to weasel
>> your way out still doesn't work, fool. You knowing take actionas that
>> result in animal deaths, you are culpable.
>
> What actions do I take? I think you might fit into the pathology that I
> was mentioning earlier. Walk to store -- nothing dies. Plan menu en
> route -- nothing dies. Walk through store -- nothing dies. Buy
> ingredients -- nothing dies. Take out money -- nothing dies. Go home --
> nothing dies. Eat my meal -- nothing dies.
======================
Except that you are brain-dead, fool.


>
> Please define my actions of killing? What weapon did I use?
=================
Your lifestyle, pansy-boy...

>
>> > If you "feel" guilty, I suspect that is your difficulty and has nothing
>> > to do with the fact that neither of killed an animal today.
>> ======================
>> And it still doesn't absolve either of us from the fact that animals died
>> as
>> a direct result of our *actions*. Kepp up the good work displaying your
>> ignorance, pansy-boy.
>
> As a result of my actions? There you go put forth foolish arguments.
> It's like the rapist who claims, "she made me do it". I now control you.
> Anything you do is my fault. You are powerless to resist my every whim.
> You must respond. You have no will, desire or control over your own
> behaviour.
======================
LOL Tell us why, mr freud.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article . net>,
> "rick etter" > wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article >, "Dutch" >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Reynard" > wrote
>> >> > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
>> >> > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
>> >>
>> >> It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that their
>> >> diets
>> >> are not bloodless.
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
>> > degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
>> > logical rationalization.
>> =====================
>> No, it defies your retardation, idiot. That you can't understand that
>> any
>> action that you take, that you know causes the exact result you claim to
>> be
>> avoiding and makes you culpable, is quite amusing.
>
> I stated my culpability. I am participating in allowing killers to kill
> animals to provide safety and security to those who must live in
> proximity to people who are thrive on bloodlust and the infliction of
> pain, suffering and death. Like paedophilia, there is no known cure for
> individuals who delight in the killing of animals. I choose it as a
> 'lesser of two evils'. I am fully aware of what I do and why I do it.
>
> I eat meat several days each week to ensure that there is an ample
> requirement for meat products as the meat killers are unwilling to
> accept responsibility for their actions against animals. Like most
> treatment and cure, until they can respond to their denial I must
> moderate my choices. Since, I do know they are unwilling to accept
> responsibility, I make my choices.
================
Total lack of intellegent response noted. Total display of ignorance
shown, yet again. Tell us again how yyou have determined that vegan food
producers have all somehow become physco-paths, mr freud.


>
>> > I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
>> > ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am.
>> ================
>> LOL ANy body is, fool
>
> Have you considered raising livestock? Your level of aggression that you
> display towards humans might be better served killing animals.
=====================
Really? What animals are rasised for food for vegans, idiot?


>
>> They can live
>> > their daily lives without having to kill.
>> ==================
>> What have you or I killed today? Personally I don't kill anything
>> myself,
>> so I guess to you I'm just as pure as a vegan, eh dolt?
>
> That would be correct. You and I are only responsible for our actions.
> Neither of us killed anything today and neither did any vegan that I've
> spoken with tody.
=====================
Yes, we are responsible for our actions. That your are trying to weasel
your way out still doesn't work, fool. You knowing take actionas that
result in animal deaths, you are culpable.


>
> If you "feel" guilty, I suspect that is your difficulty and has nothing
> to do with the fact that neither of killed an animal today.
======================
And it still doesn't absolve either of us from the fact that animals died as
a direct result of our *actions*. Kepp up the good work displaying your
ignorance, pansy-boy.

Ron wrote:
> In article >, "Dutch"
>
> wrote:
>
> > "Reynard" > wrote
> > > They are doing exactly what they say they're doing: abstaining
> > > from meat, so stop pushing it onto them, pusher.
> >
> > It's not about "pushing meat", it's about reminding vegans that
their diets
> > are not bloodless.
>
> Unfortunately, arguments such as the one that Dutch makes assumes a
> degree of responsibility for the actions of others that defies any
> logical rationalization.

No, stupid ****, they're obvious to anyone with a working brain.
You're in the position of one who receives stolen goods. It's a
well-known legal and ethical principle.

DAMN, you're stupid.

>
> I admire vegans in that they do seem to be able to live up to their
> ethical values. Vegans are certainly better than I am. They can live
> their daily lives without having to kill.
They don't even try, you massive idiot.