Vegetarian Discussion: The Pre-Existent State: Goob's Own Nightmare

The Pre-Existent State: Goob's Own Nightmare
Posts: 49

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5   Next  (First | Last)

Shrubkiller
2007-09-07 15:04:51 EST


Numerous quotes of Goob's are readily available to show that he
discussed the "pre-existent state" as though he accepted it as
reality.

Now it has come back to haunt him. Goob's only function is to disrupt
newsgroups and prevent people from learning and discussing the horrors
of the animal product diet.

If people start considering the pre-existent state they have to wonder
what the relationship between human and the rest of the sentient
beings is in this state.

Surely it cannot be the same as it is in the PHYSICAL world since a
purely spiritual pre-existent state would require no FOOD. As such
there'd be no factory farms, no slaughter houses, no animals living in
fear of the one demented mammal form.

All these considerations could persuade people that perhaps we should
emulate the pre-existent state to the point where we don't kill and
eat other sentients.

Goo is terrified of that possibility so he's doing *everything* he
possibly can to pretend he never believed for an instant that there's
a pre-existent state.

Poor little Goobs.

Out stupiding himself for the benefit of all living creatures.


Rudy Canoza
2007-09-07 15:18:33 EST
pudgy fat queer ronnnnnie hamilton, who is afraid of
me, lied:
>
> Numerous quotes of Rudy's are readily available to show that he
> discussed the "pre-existent state" as though he accepted it as
> reality.

False. I have only referenced it to point out that Goo
- that's Fuckwit David Harrison - needs it for his
story. Goo is the one who needs it for his story,
ronnnnnnie.

I have demonstrated that coming into existence -
"getting to experience life" - is not a benefit
*precisely* because there is no "pre-existence", as Goo
believes there to be.

Shrubkiller
2007-09-07 15:20:51 EST
On Sep 7, 1:18 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
> pudgy fat queer ronnnnnie hamilton, who is afraid of
> me, lied:
>
>
>
> > Numerous quotes of Rudy's are readily available to show that he
> > discussed the "pre-existent state" as though he accepted it as
> > reality.
>
> False. I have only referenced it to point out that Goo
> - that's Fuckwit David Harrison - needs it for his
> story. Goo is the one who needs it for his story,
> ronnnnnnie.
>
> I have demonstrated that coming into existence -
> "getting to experience life" - is not a benefit
> *precisely* because there is no "pre-existence", as Goo
> believes there to be.



S-u-r-r-r-e Goo........whatever ya say Goo.


Rudy Canoza
2007-09-07 15:41:11 EST
pudgy queer ronnnnnie hamilton, who is afraid of me, lied:
> On Sep 7, 1:18 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
>> pudgy queer ronnnnnie hamilton, who is afraid of
>> me, lied:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Numerous quotes of Rudy's are readily available to show that he
>>> discussed the "pre-existent state" as though he accepted it as
>>> reality.
>> False. I have only referenced it to point out that Goo
>> - that's Fuckwit David Harrison - needs it for his
>> story. Goo is the one who needs it for his story,
>> ronnnnnnie.
>>
>> I have demonstrated that coming into existence -
>> "getting to experience life" - is not a benefit
>> *precisely* because there is no "pre-existence", as Goo
>> believes there to be.
>
>
>
> S-u-r-r-r-e Rudy........whatever ya say Rudy.

What I said is correct. Goo - that's Fuckwit David
Harrison - is the one who needs "pre-existence" for his
fuckwitted nonsense story. My belief is based on the
opposite: that there is no "pre-existence".

Goo uses "pre-existence", ronnnnnnnie, you pudgy queer.
I only gave a name to it.

You *are* a queer, aren't you, ronnnnnnie? You've
never denied it, and it fits perfectly with your
perpetually bitchiness.

Kickin' Goober's Faggot Ass
2007-09-07 15:42:52 EST
On Sep 7, 1:41 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
> pudgy queer ronnnnnie hamilton, who is afraid of me, lied:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 7, 1:18 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
> >> pudgy queer ronnnnnie hamilton, who is afraid of
> >> me, lied:
>
> >>> Numerous quotes of Rudy's are readily available to show that he
> >>> discussed the "pre-existent state" as though he accepted it as
> >>> reality.
> >> False. I have only referenced it to point out that Goo
> >> - that's Fuckwit David Harrison - needs it for his
> >> story. Goo is the one who needs it for his story,
> >> ronnnnnnie.
>
> >> I have demonstrated that coming into existence -
> >> "getting to experience life" - is not a benefit
> >> *precisely* because there is no "pre-existence", as Goo
> >> believes there to be.
>
> > S-u-r-r-r-e Rudy........whatever ya say Rudy.
>
> What I said is correct. Goo - that's Fuckwit David
> Harrison - is the one who needs "pre-existence" for his
> fuckwitted nonsense story. My belief is based on the
> opposite: that there is no "pre-existence".
>
> Goo uses "pre-existence", ronnnnnnnie, you pudgy queer.
> I only gave a name to it.
>
> You *are* a queer, aren't you, ronnnnnnie? You've
> never denied it, and it fits perfectly with your
> perpetually bitchiness.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -




S-u-r-r-r-e Goo........whatever ya say Goo.



Rudy Canoza
2007-09-07 15:46:52 EST
pudgy queer ronnnnnie hamilton, who is afraid of me, lied:
> On Sep 7, 1:41 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
>> pudgy queer ronnnnnie hamilton, who is afraid of me, lied:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Sep 7, 1:18 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
>>>> pudgy queer ronnnnnie hamilton, who is afraid of
>>>> me, lied:
>>>>> Numerous quotes of Rudy's are readily available to show that he
>>>>> discussed the "pre-existent state" as though he accepted it as
>>>>> reality.
>>>> False. I have only referenced it to point out that Goo
>>>> - that's Fuckwit David Harrison - needs it for his
>>>> story. Goo is the one who needs it for his story,
>>>> ronnnnnnie.
>>>> I have demonstrated that coming into existence -
>>>> "getting to experience life" - is not a benefit
>>>> *precisely* because there is no "pre-existence", as Goo
>>>> believes there to be.
>>> S-u-r-r-r-e Rudy........whatever ya say Rudy.
>> What I said is correct. Goo - that's Fuckwit David
>> Harrison - is the one who needs "pre-existence" for his
>> fuckwitted nonsense story. My belief is based on the
>> opposite: that there is no "pre-existence".
>>
>> Goo uses "pre-existence", ronnnnnnnie, you pudgy queer.
>> I only gave a name to it.
>>
>> You *are* a queer, aren't you, ronnnnnnie? You've
>> never denied it, and it fits perfectly with your
>> perpetually bitchiness.
>
>
> S-u-r-r-r-e Rudy........whatever ya say Rudy.

Thought so...

Dutch
2007-09-07 21:13:07 EST
shrubkiller wrote:
>
> Numerous quotes of Goob's are readily available to show that he
> discussed the "pre-existent state" as though he accepted it as
> reality.

Wrong, discussion of a "pre-existent state" was always phrased as
"if-then", simply to show that it makes no difference if it is a real
phenomenon or not, exactly as it is expressed in Salt's essay.

Get real and stop looking to score cheap points.

Shrubkiller
2007-09-08 13:27:44 EST
On Sep 7, 7:13 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> shrubkiller wrote:
>
> > Numerous quotes of Goob's are readily available to show that he
> > discussed the "pre-existent state" as though he accepted it as
> > reality.
>
> Wrong, discussion of a "pre-existent state" was always phrased as
> "if-then", simply to show that it makes no difference if it is a real
> phenomenon or not, exactly as it is expressed in Salt's essay.
>
> Get real and stop looking to score cheap points.



I don't think so Dutch but even if you are half way right about Goo's
"if-then" position the fact is that Goo did a no-no.

He got people thinking about the relationship that ALL sentient beings
on the planet should enjoy.

Or are you and Goo going to tell us that in the "if-then" pre-existent
state that man eats other beings?



Rudy Canoza
2007-09-08 13:37:18 EST
pudgy queer and community college toilet pervert
ronnnnnie hamilton, who is afraid of me, lied:
> On Sep 7, 7:13 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>> pudgy queer and community college toilet pervert ronnnnnie hamilton, who is afraid of me, lied:
>>
>>> Numerous quotes of Rudy's are readily available to show that he
>>> discussed the "pre-existent state" as though he accepted it as
>>> reality.
>> Wrong, discussion of a "pre-existent state" was always phrased as
>> "if-then", simply to show that it makes no difference if it is a real
>> phenomenon or not, exactly as it is expressed in Salt's essay.
>>
>> Get real and stop looking to score cheap points.
>
>
>
> I don't think so Dutch

Yes, he got it exactly right, pudgy queer (which you
don't deny being.) I never expressed a belief in
"pre-existence", and you know it. I always wrote about
it in an if-then context: if there is such a state,
then these are the implications of it. It every case,
pudgy queer (which you don't deny being), I went on to
say that I don't believe in it, and that Goo - that's
Fuckwit David Harrison - is a stupid cracker for
believing in it. At no time did I say that I believed
in it, pudgy queer (which you don't deny being.) You
can't find a single statement I made that indicates I
believe in it; you can only find Goo's - that's Fuckwit
David Harrison - mangled editions of things I've
written, the ones where he has removed entire clauses
of sentences to try to make it appear I believe the
opposite of what I actually believe. You know those
mangled quotes are fraudulent, pudgy queer (which you
don't deny being), but you're too much a gutless
chickenshit to acknowledge it.

You're a not-serious gutless pudgy queer, ronnnnnnnie.


> but even if you are half way right about Rudy's
> "if-then" position

He is fully right about it, pudgy queer (which you
don't deny being), and you know it.


> the fact is that Rudy did a no-no.
>
> He got people thinking about the relationship that ALL sentient beings
> on the planet should enjoy.

No, I wouldn't say I did that. All I did was provoke
Goo - that's Fuckwit David Harrison - to another spasm
of quote-mangling, and provoke you to shove your head
still farther up Goo's ass. You two make quite a sick
pair, pudgy queer (which you don't deny being.)

You're not a serious contributor here, pudgy queer
(which you don't deny being), and you never were.

Dutch
2007-09-08 15:43:27 EST
shrubkiller wrote:
> On Sep 7, 7:13 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>> shrubkiller wrote:
>>
>>> Numerous quotes of Goob's are readily available to show that he
>>> discussed the "pre-existent state" as though he accepted it as
>>> reality.
>> Wrong, discussion of a "pre-existent state" was always phrased as
>> "if-then", simply to show that it makes no difference if it is a real
>> phenomenon or not, exactly as it is expressed in Salt's essay.
>>
>> Get real and stop looking to score cheap points.
>
>
>
> I don't think so Dutch but even if you are half way right about Goo's
> "if-then" position the fact is that Goo did a no-no.

Just read Salt's essay on The Logic of the Larder, that will clarify
things for you. We have always used the concept in the same way he does.

> He got people thinking about the relationship that ALL sentient beings
> on the planet should enjoy.

If you want to live in a fantasy world that's your business.

> Or are you and Goo going to tell us that in the "if-then" pre-existent
> state that man eats other beings?

I'm not going to try to make sense out of nonsense questions.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron