thesun12490
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 10 |   |
Karma: 0
|
Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/16 02:34
Ray. You don't seem to have responded to my reply, although it could be a problem with my
you is;
[start] [Jon (shitbag Slater)]
I'd be happy to help you get into that situation [end]
If you did reply, and it looks as if you might have, could you repost it so I can read it? I've brought my post back here in case you missed mine.
I disagree. There's a lot to be gained and nothing to lose, apart from your hypocrisy and double standards. Although I'm not about to try and change your ways.
Unless that person has proclaimed himself to be a part of "the side", of course. After that little oath of allegiance has been made, any statement they unwittingly make later on which proves them to be false, is ignored.
Then, if anyone should say, "for example if one rabbit would save 1000 humans, then I could accept that the rabbit should die." you would conclude that that person does not support vivisection? Do you think that vivisecting animals for our benefit is right, even using Zakhar's ratio of 1:1000?
The principle behind vivisection is to use animals as models. Zakhar has made three clear statements which show he believes vivisection makes sense;
"for example if one rabbit would save 1000 humans, then I could accept that the rabbit should die."
Zakhar 2003-02-02
That alone should say it loud and clear to you.
"The real life case of a 19 year old with vCJD being experimented on without his consent, is a form of vivisection. Most of us can accept that it was the right thing to do, in this sad case.
We can take the same decision making process, independent of species."
Zakhar 2003-09-28
From that, as well as his other example, he has unwittingly shown that he does support vivisection. He believes that "most of us can accept that it's the right thing to do", and that
"we can take the same decision making process, independent of species."
"There can be cases for animal experimentation as there can be for human experiments. It would make sense to test a new antibiotic for guinea pigs on guinea pigs rather than humans, don't you think?"
Zakhar 2003-02-17
You see? It makes sense to him to use animals for cures, even for other animals. That IS the principle behind vivisection; to use animals as models.
Unlike you, I'm not defending members of a
"side". You obviously are though, and it's this blind support for the "members" on it, rather than the principles behind it, that has let you down.
If Zakhar will allow animals to die at his chosen ratio, why do you criticise John Mercer for doing the same?
How can anyone be said to support the rights of man or beast while at the same time supporting the principle of vivisecting them against their will, whatever ratio they use, or whatever benefits accrued?
Yes. Your lack of understanding on these issues, and the bending of your earlier stated principles is allowing you to harbour supporters of vivisection to continue feigning membership into a legitimate movement against it. That you choose to ignore the evidence, written by his own hand, shows you are willing to allow some people to support this trade while criticising others who are more open about it.
You earlier wrote, "I detest 'vivisection' and those who support its evil abuse of animals.", but that is a lie, because at this very moment you are supporting someone who thinks it permissible to vivisect animals for our gains according to the ratio they set. You now have no argument against anyone who openly supports vivisection.
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
thesun12490
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 10 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/16 04:35
So it's clear now that I didn't take your quote out of context.by ommitting something about your alleged alternatives, because they were never in your statements to begin with. It's no wonder the antis have such an easy time with you, Liehar.
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
studboyx
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 39 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/16 07:42
I'm not using double standards, If "Zakhar" has posted his support for vivisection it must have been a hell of a long time ago. Even then I am certain you took his words out of context.
No I am saying if forced to apply your logic we are *Both* hypocrites. We both take medication we *Know* to have been tested on animals.
Because the situation is forced upon me by you.
As for who started
Yet you/I use medication we know to be a product of their exploitation of animals.
How do you talk your way out of that one?
I feel insulted by the whole stinking issue Derek. I do not know what motivation you have for ripping into "Zakar", I was astounded when I read your initial posting.
This whole lousy issue was created by you Derek.
Your quotes are from the past. If you had reservations about them, why leave it until now to raise the issue?
Now answer my question about the medication you take.
Popular posts by studboyx
Fuck this for a game of soldiers.
Cruelty towards Bears
Doody Resorts to e-mail
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
rhackett17
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 28 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/16 10:44
You can't replicate the context.
Are you a vivisectionist discussing vivisection with me? -
No; therefore the context is incomplete.
This is not the answer to "Why didn't you want to discuss it with me, to establish MY view?
Popular posts by rhackett17
Where does YOUR meat come from?
ISP Warning for Ray.
HUNTING (RSPCA UPDATE)
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
thesun12490
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 10 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/16 14:10
Of course it is, if the text is right, Liehar.
I did not QUOTE you out of context. You lied.
You were talking of your own opinion when you made your statement;
"for example if one rabbit would save 1000 humans, then I could accept that the rabbit should die."
Zakhar 2003-02-02 and this is easily demonstrated by your use of the possessive in, "then *I* could accept that the rabbit should die."
Bad try, Liehar.
It's your claim that my quote; "Then human rights cannot be overridden, period.", doesn't follow, so the burden of proof is yours to show where or how.
People do not sacrifice or are forced to sacrifice their inalienable right not to used as lab models in research, so your points on abortion or the relocation of people is a diversion.
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
thesun12490
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 10 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/16 15:43
That's pathetic. Stand your ground, nebbish!
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
thesun12490
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 10 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/16 18:25
My mistake. I've seen your reply in Google and shall respond to it later.
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
rhackett17
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 28 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/16 22:52
Why do you insist on quoting me out of context, and ignoring me when the context is reapplied?
The 1:1000 ratio can only be used when there are no alternatives. In every case I can imagine, there will always be alternatives.
You are fearful of debate and honesty. It clearly frightens you.
Why would you take fleas off your dog and give them to another one?
Popular posts by rhackett17
Where does YOUR meat come from?
ISP Warning for Ray.
HUNTING (RSPCA UPDATE)
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
thesun12490
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 10 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/17 00:38
That's a lie. You never mentioned anything about alternatives.
[start Jackie Girgis] [Zakhar]
Most animals die for experiments that do not save or extend human life. Some you must know are devoid of any realistic use. I accept that there may be cases where the interests of humans outweigh that of some animals. There will always be conflicts of interests, and, if for example if one rabbit would save 1000 humans, then I could accept that the rabbit should die. On the other hand why should you conduct LD50 tests on household chemicals, test for the effect of alcohol on goldfish, see how long it will take a cat to die from sleep deprivation, etc?
[end]
http://tinyurl.com/q6vy
Where did you mention anything about your ratio only being applicable if there are no alternatives?
You even lie like an anti, Liehar.
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
thesun12490
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 10 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/17 04:39
His family gave the consent to go ahead, as in most cases where the patient is unconscious.
We all give consent to be treated, unless of course you've made a special arrangement with your hospital beforehand.
That's an obvious lie which I can prove in three lines from your own hand.
"for example if one rabbit would save 1000 humans, then I could accept that the rabbit should die."
Zakhar 2003-02-02
You also promote current practices which use animals, so which one shall I believe?
So you say, in the here and now, but your earlier statements prove that you do support it.
I have been honest, although you've lied here several times already by claiming I missquoted you.
I come here to question why people consider themselves to be ARA while holding a belief that animals can be killed in labs according to their personal ratios. What makes you any different from the rest?
Are you going to start chasing me around this forum calling me baldy, or something, now?
Let's face it: it's all you do anyway.
The quotes speak for themselves. I haven't had to distort them.
You'll be surprised how little I need Google. I'm not saying I don't need it, because I do to get the exact quotes I need with their correct dates. The thing is, is that I remember nearly every damn thing
I've written here, and most of what I read from others too, because I have an excellent memory.
It's so good, that I've been accused of plagiarism before now, and if it's true, it's because I remember what I've read that day on a subject almost verbatim.
I can answer that one for you right now, if you want. I was 24 when I had mine.
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
thesun12490
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 10 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/17 09:01
So why did you lie when earlier claiming that the guy had "had an experiment on his brain without consent"?
And that, to you means we can also experiment on them without their consent because it's for the common good. Thanks for giving me your reasons why you still favour animal experiments, Zakhar.
Which, even if true is a lot different to the rights violations you favour when promoting the use of animals in labs. If their rights were overridden, then they have been treated wrongly.
Then I wouldn't produce it in the first place. It's wrong to use animals for the testing of drugs, and any genuine proponent of animal rights would argue very strongly against that practice. You, on the other hand, seem to think it's perfectly fine to use them if it's for the common good. You clearly aren't a genuine AR proponent if you think their rights can be violated in this way.
It cannot stand, whether alternatives exist or not. If a person or animal has the right not to be killed for our benefit, then that right is inalienable. It would be morally wrong to use them. If there are no alternatives other than using human beings, then, as rights holders, they are not used and the drug or treatment is left unused and untested.
She supports it for the same reasons you do.
Jackie believes that 1000 animals should be used and killed in labs to help save the lives of a million people.
You've lied several times already, so why should I believe you now? You dishonestly claimed I always misquote you, yet now, after I proved I didn't do any such thing by bringing the whole discussion here from Google archives, you concede that I didn't misquote afterall because the context you were talking about was only implied rather than written down.
You also claimed that a man was undergoing treatment without consent, and then tried to stupidly compare him to lab rats, but when I showed you that his family were behind the experts giving him that treatment, and that his rights were being respected at all times, you failed to acknowledge you lied and carried on regardless.
You do condone the use of animals in labs according to your preferred cost to benefit ratio, and that is all anyone needs to know to conclude that you support the principle of vivisection.
You do support it, and you've given me your reason for supporting it too. You believe we are their guardians, and that this position gives us enough reason to use them for the common good of others.
You're a proven liar, so how can I possibly believe you when trying to convince me you're being honest?
You slipped up, Zakhar, and made several comments which prove you do support it.
You've even given me your reasons for supporting it as well: that we are the guardians of animals and can make the decision to use them if it benefits the common good. You're sunk.
Because you're a liar who supports the use of animals in labs. Besides, people who claim they deserve respect never get it. In fact, they lose any respect they might have had as soon as they start demanding it. Didn't you know that?
Then you lied when claiming I always misquote you. I quoted you correctly and gave the dates when you made them.
That's a lie because all your quotes are in Google archives, and they are complete.
Pathetic! You made your quotes without any external pressure and of your own accord, but now, after being shown that they reveal your true views on vivisection, you're trying to claim you had something on your mind that made you make a mistake, although you can't remember what. Pathetic!
That's bullshit. Writing, "for example if one rabbit would save 1000 humans, then I could accept that the rabbit should die." Zakhar 2003-02-02 is not exploring someone else's thoughts. It's giving your own thoughts, and this is easily demonstrated by your use of the possessive in, "then *I* could accept that the rabbit should die."
You're wriggling, lying and squirming all over the place, making one bad excuse after another.
You're pathetic!
That's a lie.
"for example if one rabbit would save 1000 humans, then I could accept that the rabbit should die."
Zakhar 2003-02-02
It IS true, Zakhar. You and Ray run around here like a couple of kids in a teenager's chatroom. Your one-liners aren't even funny or creative, yet day after day the pair of you make right chumps out of yourselves by trying to be cute.
Occasionally, but anyone can crib something from The Telegraph or other on-line sources of information to fill a page. The sad fact is that neither of you contribute anything of your own, and neither of you haven't any set of real principles to argue with, so you heckle instead with stupid little remarks.
Did I mention ~~jonnie~~ the dwarf, or baldy shorty legs, Zakhar?
No, I haven't. I can read as well as the next man who reads your quotes to see that you do support it. Ray wants to ignore them, but
I won't.
I don't score points. I argue for them using my own reasoning, and if someone claims animals should be used in labs to help save human lives, as you do, then I go after them. It's what I do, and I don't make exceptions for anyone.
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
rhackett17
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 28 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/17 12:09
One day, I'm sure he'll master the rudiments of Google with his dad's name.
You are his dad aren't you?
Popular posts by rhackett17
Where does YOUR meat come from?
ISP Warning for Ray.
HUNTING (RSPCA UPDATE)
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
thesun12490
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 10 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/17 16:09
You have repeatedly lied by claiming I QUOTED you out of context. I clearly didn't QUOTE you wrongly at all.
No, it does not, because it's a fact that you do support vivisection, even if only in principle, and these questions on other rights violations are an obvious diversion.
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
thesun12490
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 10 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/17 16:16
Why do you criticise me for going after the author who wrote;
"I believe that animals have certain interests that should be protected by law, some might call these rights, some protected interests could be called animal welfare. Like humans these protected rights are overridden, as there is a greater good coming from the sacrifice of the right."
Zakhar 2003-02-03
"for example if one rabbit would save 1000 humans, then I could accept that the rabbit should die."
Zakhar 2003-02-02
"The real life case of a 19 year old with vCJD being experimented on without his consent, is a form of vivisection. Most of us can accept that it was the right thing to do, in this sad case.
We can take the same decision making process, independent of species."
Zakhar 2003-09-28
"There can be cases for animal experimentation as there can be for human experiments. It would make sense to test a new antibiotic for guinea pigs on guinea pigs rather than humans, don't you think?"
Zakhar 2003-02-17
What damage am I doing going after this author, and why should I give him a free pass?
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
rhackett17
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 28 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/17 22:06
There was no reason to in THAT discussion. In the context I was discussing with Jackie it did not matter, as I thought that the information was superfluous to HER. (She wouldn't give a shit if there were alternatives or not).In THAT discussion I was trying to understand HER position and view. We have most to learn from those that have differing views, as discussing something with someone with exactly the same view is of very limited value).
That's why you need to establish ALL the facts BEFORE shouting your gob off.
Why didn't you want to discuss it with me, to establish MY view? An
ADDITIONAL point that I'd like to make is that a person's view may have changed or developed, so you need to check out that person's current view, and clarify what they meant then, and what they think now.
"scene setting". My writing style is tends to be short and to the point. I do not have the time to think about the way something I write to a person can be perceived by every reader, particularly when it may be many months apart.
Why would you take fleas off your dog and give them to another one?
Popular posts by rhackett17
Where does YOUR meat come from?
ISP Warning for Ray.
HUNTING (RSPCA UPDATE)
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
rhackett17
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 28 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/18 05:11
That is NOT the whole context. The context was MY discussion with a
VIVISECTIONIST, several months ago.
To derive it's TRUE meaning you need the associated surroundings and setting, this is much more than just words.
You never answer any questions do you Derek?
That's why you need to establish ALL the facts BEFORE shouting your gob off.
Why didn't you want to discuss it with me, to establish MY view?
Why would you take fleas off your dog and give them to another one?
Popular posts by rhackett17
Where does YOUR meat come from?
ISP Warning for Ray.
HUNTING (RSPCA UPDATE)
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
rhackett17
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 28 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/18 08:08
I'm not advocating any illegal activity.
What about those killed in war? Those forcibly moved from their properties in a dam project? What about those killed by society for murder / rape / having sex outside marriage? What about female circumcision? What about abortion? What about interrogation of spies? What about squatters?
Popular posts by rhackett17
Where does YOUR meat come from?
ISP Warning for Ray.
HUNTING (RSPCA UPDATE)
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
rhackett17
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 28 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/18 12:52
Not DIVERSION Derek, answering YOUR raising of my point about sacrificing rights.
Can't you follow a simple thread?
Popular posts by rhackett17
Where does YOUR meat come from?
ISP Warning for Ray.
HUNTING (RSPCA UPDATE)
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
rhackett17
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 28 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/18 17:27
You've done it AGAIN, you shit.
"In the *context* I was discussing with Jackie it did not matter, as ...."
You never answer any questions do you Derek?
That's why you need to establish ALL the facts BEFORE shouting your gob off.
Why didn't you want to discuss it with me, to establish MY view?
Why would you take fleas off your dog and give them to another one?
Popular posts by rhackett17
Where does YOUR meat come from?
ISP Warning for Ray.
HUNTING (RSPCA UPDATE)
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
rhackett17
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 28 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Was there a response from Ray? - 2007/03/18 17:43
There was no need to in THAT discussion...etc, etc. You know the stuff you never want to discuss. You can only throw stones Derek.
Popular posts by rhackett17
Where does YOUR meat come from?
ISP Warning for Ray.
HUNTING (RSPCA UPDATE)
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
|
post new topic