Touya Miho
User
Expert
| Posts: 133 |   |
Karma: 0
|
Re:Sorry ~~jonnie~~ - 2003/02/22 05:46
Forget about this chickenshit, you chickenshit. Let`s get back to basics - your moral incoherence:
GregGeorg...WankHar (he prefers "Zakhar", for some reason, but it`s not his name) believes, in a vague, mushy, incoherent way, in animal "rights". He feels, for reasons he can`t explain, that it is wrong for animals to be raised (no matter the condition of their lives), slaughtered, and sold as meat in grocery stores. He will, like a good little sleazy "ara", try to carve out some kind of exemption for that mythical man, the Eskimo on an ice floe. But he believes the ordinary consumer in a developed economy should not be allowed to buy meat in a grocery store.
GregGeorg...WankHar acknowledges that he does not pursue his belief as far as "veganism". A "vegan" is one who does not directly and knowingly - and, in a few highly visible but entirely symbolic issues, indirectly - consume any animal product: no meat, no eggs, no dairy products, no wool or leather clothing or upholstery, no honey, no gelatin: if the product contains even a micro
47 gram of animal parts, and the "vegan" knows it, he will
1f80 not consume it. As far as avoiding animal use indirectly, the "vegan" will not consume cosmetic products that have been tested on animals, but they (shame!) will gladly consume medicines that have been similarly tested on animals.
So, GregGeorg...WankHar confesses he is not a "vegan". He is a coward, so he refuses to divulge the specific ways in which he diverges from "veganism". Does he eat some meat, maybe poultry? Does he consume some dairy products, or eggs? Does he wear leather? Does he use cosmetics (tee hee!) that have been tested on animals? Because he`s gutless, he won`t say; we just know that he declares himself NOT "vegan".
Now, "vegans" are already, themselves, incoherent, because even if they don`t *consume* animals, they nonetheless cause massive numbers of them to be killed. However, they can tell you fairly quickly where they draw the line, and why. They draw it to exclude any product that contains animal parts, and to exclude cosmetics - but NOT medicines - that were tested on animals. It`s a stupid rule, but it`s pretty clear.
Not GregGeorg...WankHar, though! WankHar consumes products that contain animal parts. He can`t tell you why he consumes some and not others. He has babbled stupidly in the past about some weighing of interests, but it is clear he has no clear idea of how to weigh them, except in a slovenly, ad hoc, off-the-cuff manner. There is no theory, no set of objective standard. It`s just whatever feels good to GregGeorg...WankHar, right then and there. He could well decide differently the following day, differently again the day after that, indefinitely.
GregGeorg...WankHar is completely incoherent. He`s a fruitcake.
Popular posts by Touya Miho
Excellent series of Dilbert cartoon...
"reflexology": buncombe, not scienc...
Suit against McDonalds dismissed: "...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Touya Miho
User
Expert
| Posts: 133 | |
Karma: 0
|
Re:Sorry ~~jonnie~~ - 2003/02/22 07:07
Forget about this
1f80 chickenshit, you chickenshit. Let`s get back to basics - your moral incoherence:
GregGeorg...WankHar (he prefers "Zakhar", for some reason, but it`s not his name) believes, in a vague, mushy, incoherent way, in animal "rights". He feels, for reasons he can`t explain, that it is wrong for animals to be raised (no matter the condition of their lives), slaughtered, and sold as meat in grocery stores. He will, like a good little sleazy "ara", try to carve out some kind of exemption for that mythical man, the Eskimo on an ice floe. But he believes the ordinary consumer in a developed economy should not be allowed to buy meat in a grocery store.
GregGeorg...WankHar acknowledges that he does not pursue his belief as far as "veganism". A "vegan" is one who does not directly and knowingly - and, in a few highly visible but entirely symbolic issues, indirectly - consume any animal product: no meat, no eggs, no dairy products, no wool or leather clothing or upholstery, no honey, no gelatin: if the product contains even a microgram of animal parts, and the "vegan" knows it, he will not consume it. As far as avoiding animal use indirectly, the "vegan" will not consume cosmetic products that have been tested on animals, but they (shame!) will gladly consume medicines that have been similarly tested on animals.
So, GregGeorg...WankHar confesses he is not a "vegan". He is a coward, so he refuses to divulge the specific ways in which he diverges from "veganism". Does he eat some meat, maybe poultry? Does he consume some dairy products, or eggs? Does he wear leather? Does he use cosmetics (tee hee!) that have been tested on animals? Because he`s gutless, he won`t say; we just know that he declares himself NOT "vegan".
Now, "vegans" are already, themselves, incoherent, because even if they don`t *consume* animals, they nonetheless cause massive numbers of them to be killed. However, they can tell you fairly quickly where they draw the line, and why. They draw it to exclude any product that contains animal parts, and to exclude cosmetics - but NOT medicines - that were tested on animals. It`s a stupid rule, but it`s pretty clear.
Not GregGeorg...WankHar, though! WankHar consumes products that contain animal parts. He can`t tell you why he consumes some and not others. He has babbled stupidly in the past about some weighing of interests, but it is clear he has no clear idea of how to weigh them, except in a slovenly, ad hoc, off-the-cuff manner. There is no theory, no set of objective standard. It`s just whatever feels good to GregGeorg...WankHar, right then and there. He could well decide differently the following day, differently again the day after that, indefinitely.
GregGeorg...WankHar is completely incoherent. He`s a fruitcake.
Popular posts by Touya Miho
Excellent series of Dilbert cartoon...
"reflexology": buncombe, not scienc...
Suit against McDonalds dismissed: "...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
|
post new topic