This guy? is not worth the time..... he obviously has no real meaning or
purpose in life and spends ENORMOUS amount of time baiting
vegetarians....don't reply to him or humor his geeky little power
trip....if ever i've seen a troll he's a troll.....I'M PLEADING, IGNORE
THIS GUY he's been doing it for so long.
Seriously, who would spend lots of their valuable time baiting
vegetarians when they are a meat eating????.....a loser.

Chemical eX wrote:
> This guy? is not worth the time.....

And you are? You can't even write a decent sentence.

> he obviously has no real meaning or
> purpose in life

His life appears significantly more meaningful and purposeful than the
average vegan posting to this group.

> and spends ENORMOUS amount of time baiting
> vegetarians....

One man's baiting is another's correcting. You should be paying him for
his service.

<...>

Stop pretending you are a different post ~jonnie~/Rudy/Useless.
What a freakin' loser you are.

On Wed, 04 May 2005 20:06:28 +1000, Chemical eX > wrote:

>This guy? is not worth the time..... he obviously has no real meaning or
>purpose in life and spends ENORMOUS amount of time baiting
>vegetarians....don't reply to him or humor his geeky little power
>trip....if ever i've seen a troll he's a troll.....I'M PLEADING, IGNORE
>THIS GUY he's been doing it for so long.
>Seriously, who would spend lots of their valuable time baiting
>vegetarians when they are a meat eating????.....a loser.

What? Oh, you're just going along with that stupid act...the
Gonad believes that you *should* be a vegan, and has said
so. He is also extremely opposed to people even considering
contributing to decent Animal Welfare over his elimination
objective:
__________________________________________________ _______
From: Rudy Canoza >
Message-ID: . net>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 20:33:13 GMT

dh wrote:

> You obviously don't want people to consider contributing
> to decent lives for livestock over the elimination objective

1. Because it's a BOGUS comparison . . .

2. Because causing animals to live is not ethically
superior to not wanting to cause animals to live.

3. Because...no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the
deliberate killing of the animals erases all of it.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
The following are a collection of his quotes, explaining how he
wants you, me and everybody to feel about the elimination of
animals raised for food:
__________________________________________________ _______
You consider that it "got to experience life" to be
some kind of mitigation of the evil of killing it
people who consume animals justify the harm they inflict
on the animals by believing that "giving" life to the
animals somehow mitigates the harm.
Fact: IF it is wrong to kill animals deliberately for
food, then having deliberately caused them to live in
the first place does not mitigate the wrong in any way
"giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of
their deaths
It is morally wrong, in an absolute sense - unjust, in
other words - if humans kill animals they don't need
to kill, i.e. not in self defense. There's your answer
killing the animals needlessly and merely for human
convenience is the worst violation of their rights
humans deliberately killing animals for food is an immoral
thing to do.
Humans could change it. They could change it by ending it.
People who don't want them to exist should be "vegans".
And if everyone adopted "veg*nism", no farm animals would
live in bad conditions.
You invent some arbitrary line and head off in some other
bizarre direction...all by yourself.
[That "other bizarre direction" is the idea of deliberately
providing decent lives for the animals we raise for food]
there is no moral loss if domesticated species go extinct.
Since there is no moral loss to any animals, there is
nothing for any human to take into consideration
There is no "selfishness" involved in wanting farm animals
not to exist as a step towards creating a more just world.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯