Vegetarian Discussion: The Hypocrisy Charge Explained

The Hypocrisy Charge Explained
Posts: 13

Report Abuse

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

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)

Dutch
2008-09-05 06:47:43 EST
When vegans attack non-vegans for the fact that their
diets and lifestyles cause animal suffering and death
they are reminded of the fact that so do theirs, and
that their attacks are hypocritical.

The vegan counter to that response has frequently been
to attempt to turn the tables on the hypocrisy
argument by pointing out that non-vegans also do such
things as pay taxes to governments that wage immoral
wars. One problem with that argument is that it misses
the point of the original charge of hypocrisy.

Non-vegans are not making the hypocrisy point because
vegans are less than perfect in living by their
principles. We all fall short of living completely
according to principles, we are complicit in unfair
labor practices, we support unethical politicians, use
medicines tested on animals, treat ourselves to
luxuries while others suffer in need, and on and on.
We're imperfect, we're only human.

No, the issue is not that vegans fall short of living
up to their principles, that would never raise an
eyebrow if it were not for the fact that they are so
smug, self-righteous and hurtful in their criticisms
of others who don't share the same view of the world
they do. We genuinely see no difference between a one
gram mouse or lizard poisoned or squashed and a
two-ton steer slaughtered. If it means something to
you, then by all means eat your tofu, but please, lose
the judgmental attitude.

Rupert
2008-09-06 01:49:49 EST
On Sep 5, 6:47 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> When vegans attack non-vegans for the fact that their
> diets and lifestyles cause animal suffering and death
> they are reminded of the fact that so do theirs, and
> that their attacks are hypocritical.
>
> The vegan counter to that response has frequently been
> to attempt to turn the tables on the hypocrisy
> argument by pointing out that non-vegans also do such
> things as pay taxes to governments that wage immoral
> wars. One problem with that argument is that it misses
> the point of the original charge of hypocrisy.
>
> Non-vegans are not making the hypocrisy point because
> vegans are less than perfect in living by their
> principles. We all fall short of living completely
> according to principles, we are complicit in unfair
> labor practices, we support unethical politicians, use
> medicines tested on animals, treat ourselves to
> luxuries while others suffer in need, and on and on.
> We're imperfect, we're only human.
>
> No, the issue is not that vegans fall short of living
> up to their principles, that would never raise an
> eyebrow if it were not for the fact that they are so
> smug, self-righteous and hurtful in their criticisms
> of others who don't share the same view of the world
> they do. We genuinely see no difference between a one
> gram mouse or lizard poisoned or squashed and a
> two-ton steer slaughtered. If it means something to
> you, then by all means eat your tofu, but please, lose
> the judgmental attitude.

I'm sorry to hear you find it so hurtful. It's obviously really got to
you. I don't believe I came on here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
or being "smug and self-righteous"; I simply attempted to defend a
point of view and got vile abuse hurled at me from day one. I haven't
seen any other vegans round here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
either.

Dutch
2008-09-06 02:49:39 EST
Rupert wrote:
> On Sep 5, 6:47 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>> When vegans attack non-vegans for the fact that their
>> diets and lifestyles cause animal suffering and death
>> they are reminded of the fact that so do theirs, and
>> that their attacks are hypocritical.
>>
>> The vegan counter to that response has frequently been
>> to attempt to turn the tables on the hypocrisy
>> argument by pointing out that non-vegans also do such
>> things as pay taxes to governments that wage immoral
>> wars. One problem with that argument is that it misses
>> the point of the original charge of hypocrisy.
>>
>> Non-vegans are not making the hypocrisy point because
>> vegans are less than perfect in living by their
>> principles. We all fall short of living completely
>> according to principles, we are complicit in unfair
>> labor practices, we support unethical politicians, use
>> medicines tested on animals, treat ourselves to
>> luxuries while others suffer in need, and on and on.
>> We're imperfect, we're only human.
>>
>> No, the issue is not that vegans fall short of living
>> up to their principles, that would never raise an
>> eyebrow if it were not for the fact that they are so
>> smug, self-righteous and hurtful in their criticisms
>> of others who don't share the same view of the world
>> they do. We genuinely see no difference between a one
>> gram mouse or lizard poisoned or squashed and a
>> two-ton steer slaughtered. If it means something to
>> you, then by all means eat your tofu, but please, lose
>> the judgmental attitude.
>
> I'm sorry to hear you find it so hurtful. It's obviously really got to
> you.

It hasn't got to me, I just find it unseemly.

> I don't believe I came on here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
> or being "smug and self-righteous"; I simply attempted to defend a
> point of view and got vile abuse hurled at me from day one. I haven't
> seen any other vegans round here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
> either.

You didn't hear "pearl" call me a "demon" the other
day? You tiptoe around trying to intellectualize
everything but she is more straightforward, she calls
enjoying meat "blood lust".

Rupert
2008-09-06 03:08:36 EST
On Sep 6, 2:49 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> Rupert wrote:
> > On Sep 5, 6:47 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> >> When vegans attack non-vegans for the fact that their
> >> diets and lifestyles cause animal suffering and death
> >> they are reminded of the fact that so do theirs, and
> >> that their attacks are hypocritical.
>
> >> The vegan counter to that response has frequently been
> >> to attempt to turn the tables on the hypocrisy
> >> argument by pointing out that non-vegans also do such
> >> things as pay taxes to governments that wage immoral
> >> wars. One problem with that argument is that it misses
> >> the point of the original charge of hypocrisy.
>
> >> Non-vegans are not making the hypocrisy point because
> >> vegans are less than perfect in living by their
> >> principles. We all fall short of living completely
> >> according to principles, we are complicit in unfair
> >> labor practices, we support unethical politicians, use
> >> medicines tested on animals, treat ourselves to
> >> luxuries while others suffer in need, and on and on.
> >> We're imperfect, we're only human.
>
> >> No, the issue is not that vegans fall short of living
> >> up to their principles, that would never raise an
> >> eyebrow if it were not for the fact that they are so
> >> smug, self-righteous and hurtful in their criticisms
> >> of others who don't share the same view of the world
> >> they do. We genuinely see no difference between a one
> >> gram mouse or lizard poisoned or squashed and a
> >> two-ton steer slaughtered. If it means something to
> >> you, then by all means eat your tofu, but please, lose
> >> the judgmental attitude.
>
> > I'm sorry to hear you find it so hurtful. It's obviously really got to
> > you.
>
> It hasn't got to me, I just find it unseemly.
>
> > I don't believe I came on here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
> > or being "smug and self-righteous"; I simply attempted to defend a
> > point of view and got vile abuse hurled at me from day one. I haven't
> > seen any other vegans round here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
> > either.
>
> You didn't hear "pearl" call me a "demon" the other
> day? You tiptoe around trying to intellectualize
> everything but she is more straightforward, she calls
> enjoying meat "blood lust".

All right, fine, talk with her about it, then.

When I first came onto this newsgroup I responded to a post by
Harrison where he did his thing "Vegans contribute to the deaths of
animals..." Basically the point that I was trying to make is that I
didn't see the aim of veganism as being to completely stop
contributing to harm to animals, I've been aware since adolescence
that that is pretty difficult to do, however I didn't particularly
like what happened in factory farms (yes, I acknowledge that that
phrase stands in need of a precise definition) and my main motivation
in being vegan was to stop contributing to that. Instantly everyone
started ganging up on me and calling me a hypocrite. Ball called me a
liar and said I held an extreme animal rights position. It was
suggested that the collateral deaths argument showed that I should
just give up and become an omnivore again. It's really not very
bright. Ball also said that I was a sanctimonious hypocrite and that
that merited abuse. Ball has called me a "moral bankrupt" and a
"filthy shitstained hypocrite" many times over the years, and has also
more recently morally criticised me for working in China. It's
legitimate for me to investigate whether Ball adheres to the standards
of ethical integrity which he advocates for other people.

There's really nothing wrong with making an effort to reduce your
contribution to harm to animals and making some effort to encourage
others to do that as well. I expect you probably agree with that.

Dutch
2008-09-06 06:15:30 EST
Rupert wrote:
> On Sep 6, 2:49 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>> Rupert wrote:
>>> On Sep 5, 6:47 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>>>> When vegans attack non-vegans for the fact that their
>>>> diets and lifestyles cause animal suffering and death
>>>> they are reminded of the fact that so do theirs, and
>>>> that their attacks are hypocritical.
>>>> The vegan counter to that response has frequently been
>>>> to attempt to turn the tables on the hypocrisy
>>>> argument by pointing out that non-vegans also do such
>>>> things as pay taxes to governments that wage immoral
>>>> wars. One problem with that argument is that it misses
>>>> the point of the original charge of hypocrisy.
>>>> Non-vegans are not making the hypocrisy point because
>>>> vegans are less than perfect in living by their
>>>> principles. We all fall short of living completely
>>>> according to principles, we are complicit in unfair
>>>> labor practices, we support unethical politicians, use
>>>> medicines tested on animals, treat ourselves to
>>>> luxuries while others suffer in need, and on and on.
>>>> We're imperfect, we're only human.
>>>> No, the issue is not that vegans fall short of living
>>>> up to their principles, that would never raise an
>>>> eyebrow if it were not for the fact that they are so
>>>> smug, self-righteous and hurtful in their criticisms
>>>> of others who don't share the same view of the world
>>>> they do. We genuinely see no difference between a one
>>>> gram mouse or lizard poisoned or squashed and a
>>>> two-ton steer slaughtered. If it means something to
>>>> you, then by all means eat your tofu, but please, lose
>>>> the judgmental attitude.
>>> I'm sorry to hear you find it so hurtful. It's obviously really got to
>>> you.
>> It hasn't got to me, I just find it unseemly.
>>
>>> I don't believe I came on here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
>>> or being "smug and self-righteous"; I simply attempted to defend a
>>> point of view and got vile abuse hurled at me from day one. I haven't
>>> seen any other vegans round here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
>>> either.
>> You didn't hear "pearl" call me a "demon" the other
>> day? You tiptoe around trying to intellectualize
>> everything but she is more straightforward, she calls
>> enjoying meat "blood lust".
>
> All right, fine, talk with her about it, then.

I pretty much give up on her, she's a raving lunatic.

> When I first came onto this newsgroup I responded to a post by
> Harrison where he did his thing "Vegans contribute to the deaths of
> animals..." Basically the point that I was trying to make is that I
> didn't see the aim of veganism as being to completely stop
> contributing to harm to animals, I've been aware since adolescence
> that that is pretty difficult to do, however I didn't particularly
> like what happened in factory farms (yes, I acknowledge that that
> phrase stands in need of a precise definition) and my main motivation
> in being vegan was to stop contributing to that. Instantly everyone
> started ganging up on me and calling me a hypocrite. Ball called me a
> liar and said I held an extreme animal rights position. It was
> suggested that the collateral deaths argument showed that I should
> just give up and become an omnivore again. It's really not very
> bright. Ball also said that I was a sanctimonious hypocrite and that
> that merited abuse. Ball has called me a "moral bankrupt" and a
> "filthy shitstained hypocrite" many times over the years, and has also
> more recently morally criticised me for working in China. It's
> legitimate for me to investigate whether Ball adheres to the standards
> of ethical integrity which he advocates for other people.
>
> There's really nothing wrong with making an effort to reduce your
> contribution to harm to animals and making some effort to encourage
> others to do that as well. I expect you probably agree with that.

It's something that should be done with great humility
and diplomacy, most vegans do with patronizing smugness.

Rupert
2008-09-06 20:53:14 EST
On Sep 6, 6:15 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> Rupert wrote:
> > On Sep 6, 2:49 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> >> Rupert wrote:
> >>> On Sep 5, 6:47 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> >>>> When vegans attack non-vegans for the fact that their
> >>>> diets and lifestyles cause animal suffering and death
> >>>> they are reminded of the fact that so do theirs, and
> >>>> that their attacks are hypocritical.
> >>>> The vegan counter to that response has frequently been
> >>>> to attempt to turn the tables on the hypocrisy
> >>>> argument by pointing out that non-vegans also do such
> >>>> things as pay taxes to governments that wage immoral
> >>>> wars. One problem with that argument is that it misses
> >>>> the point of the original charge of hypocrisy.
> >>>> Non-vegans are not making the hypocrisy point because
> >>>> vegans are less than perfect in living by their
> >>>> principles. We all fall short of living completely
> >>>> according to principles, we are complicit in unfair
> >>>> labor practices, we support unethical politicians, use
> >>>> medicines tested on animals, treat ourselves to
> >>>> luxuries while others suffer in need, and on and on.
> >>>> We're imperfect, we're only human.
> >>>> No, the issue is not that vegans fall short of living
> >>>> up to their principles, that would never raise an
> >>>> eyebrow if it were not for the fact that they are so
> >>>> smug, self-righteous and hurtful in their criticisms
> >>>> of others who don't share the same view of the world
> >>>> they do. We genuinely see no difference between a one
> >>>> gram mouse or lizard poisoned or squashed and a
> >>>> two-ton steer slaughtered. If it means something to
> >>>> you, then by all means eat your tofu, but please, lose
> >>>> the judgmental attitude.
> >>> I'm sorry to hear you find it so hurtful. It's obviously really got to
> >>> you.
> >> It hasn't got to me, I just find it unseemly.
>
> >>> I don't believe I came on here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
> >>> or being "smug and self-righteous"; I simply attempted to defend a
> >>> point of view and got vile abuse hurled at me from day one. I haven't
> >>> seen any other vegans round here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
> >>> either.
> >> You didn't hear "pearl" call me a "demon" the other
> >> day? You tiptoe around trying to intellectualize
> >> everything but she is more straightforward, she calls
> >> enjoying meat "blood lust".
>
> > All right, fine, talk with her about it, then.
>
> I pretty much give up on her, she's a raving lunatic.
>
>
>
> > When I first came onto this newsgroup I responded to a post by
> > Harrison where he did his thing "Vegans contribute to the deaths of
> > animals..." Basically the point that I was trying to make is that I
> > didn't see the aim of veganism as being to completely stop
> > contributing to harm to animals, I've been aware since adolescence
> > that that is pretty difficult to do, however I didn't particularly
> > like what happened in factory farms (yes, I acknowledge that that
> > phrase stands in need of a precise definition) and my main motivation
> > in being vegan was to stop contributing to that. Instantly everyone
> > started ganging up on me and calling me a hypocrite. Ball called me a
> > liar and said I held an extreme animal rights position. It was
> > suggested that the collateral deaths argument showed that I should
> > just give up and become an omnivore again. It's really not very
> > bright. Ball also said that I was a sanctimonious hypocrite and that
> > that merited abuse. Ball has called me a "moral bankrupt" and a
> > "filthy shitstained hypocrite" many times over the years, and has also
> > more recently morally criticised me for working in China. It's
> > legitimate for me to investigate whether Ball adheres to the standards
> > of ethical integrity which he advocates for other people.
>
> > There's really nothing wrong with making an effort to reduce your
> > contribution to harm to animals and making some effort to encourage
> > others to do that as well. I expect you probably agree with that.
>
> It's something that should be done with great humility
> and diplomacy, most vegans do with patronizing smugness.

Well, I don't know about that. Anyway, you say that you have
encountered some vegans whom you find patronizing and smug; I have
been called a moral bankrupt and a filthy shitstained hypocrite for
the last six years by a man who does not adhere to the standards of
ethical integrity which he advocates for others. So there it is.

Dutch
2008-09-06 23:18:05 EST
Rupert wrote:
> On Sep 6, 6:15 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>> Rupert wrote:
>>> On Sep 6, 2:49 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>> On Sep 5, 6:47 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>>>>>> When vegans attack non-vegans for the fact that their
>>>>>> diets and lifestyles cause animal suffering and death
>>>>>> they are reminded of the fact that so do theirs, and
>>>>>> that their attacks are hypocritical.
>>>>>> The vegan counter to that response has frequently been
>>>>>> to attempt to turn the tables on the hypocrisy
>>>>>> argument by pointing out that non-vegans also do such
>>>>>> things as pay taxes to governments that wage immoral
>>>>>> wars. One problem with that argument is that it misses
>>>>>> the point of the original charge of hypocrisy.
>>>>>> Non-vegans are not making the hypocrisy point because
>>>>>> vegans are less than perfect in living by their
>>>>>> principles. We all fall short of living completely
>>>>>> according to principles, we are complicit in unfair
>>>>>> labor practices, we support unethical politicians, use
>>>>>> medicines tested on animals, treat ourselves to
>>>>>> luxuries while others suffer in need, and on and on.
>>>>>> We're imperfect, we're only human.
>>>>>> No, the issue is not that vegans fall short of living
>>>>>> up to their principles, that would never raise an
>>>>>> eyebrow if it were not for the fact that they are so
>>>>>> smug, self-righteous and hurtful in their criticisms
>>>>>> of others who don't share the same view of the world
>>>>>> they do. We genuinely see no difference between a one
>>>>>> gram mouse or lizard poisoned or squashed and a
>>>>>> two-ton steer slaughtered. If it means something to
>>>>>> you, then by all means eat your tofu, but please, lose
>>>>>> the judgmental attitude.
>>>>> I'm sorry to hear you find it so hurtful. It's obviously really got to
>>>>> you.
>>>> It hasn't got to me, I just find it unseemly.
>>>>> I don't believe I came on here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
>>>>> or being "smug and self-righteous"; I simply attempted to defend a
>>>>> point of view and got vile abuse hurled at me from day one. I haven't
>>>>> seen any other vegans round here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
>>>>> either.
>>>> You didn't hear "pearl" call me a "demon" the other
>>>> day? You tiptoe around trying to intellectualize
>>>> everything but she is more straightforward, she calls
>>>> enjoying meat "blood lust".
>>> All right, fine, talk with her about it, then.
>> I pretty much give up on her, she's a raving lunatic.
>>
>>
>>
>>> When I first came onto this newsgroup I responded to a post by
>>> Harrison where he did his thing "Vegans contribute to the deaths of
>>> animals..." Basically the point that I was trying to make is that I
>>> didn't see the aim of veganism as being to completely stop
>>> contributing to harm to animals, I've been aware since adolescence
>>> that that is pretty difficult to do, however I didn't particularly
>>> like what happened in factory farms (yes, I acknowledge that that
>>> phrase stands in need of a precise definition) and my main motivation
>>> in being vegan was to stop contributing to that. Instantly everyone
>>> started ganging up on me and calling me a hypocrite. Ball called me a
>>> liar and said I held an extreme animal rights position. It was
>>> suggested that the collateral deaths argument showed that I should
>>> just give up and become an omnivore again. It's really not very
>>> bright. Ball also said that I was a sanctimonious hypocrite and that
>>> that merited abuse. Ball has called me a "moral bankrupt" and a
>>> "filthy shitstained hypocrite" many times over the years, and has also
>>> more recently morally criticised me for working in China. It's
>>> legitimate for me to investigate whether Ball adheres to the standards
>>> of ethical integrity which he advocates for other people.
>>> There's really nothing wrong with making an effort to reduce your
>>> contribution to harm to animals and making some effort to encourage
>>> others to do that as well. I expect you probably agree with that.
>> It's something that should be done with great humility
>> and diplomacy, most vegans do with patronizing smugness.
>
> Well, I don't know about that. Anyway, you say that you have
> encountered some vegans whom you find patronizing and smug; I have
> been called a moral bankrupt and a filthy shitstained hypocrite for
> the last six years by a man who does not adhere to the standards of
> ethical integrity which he advocates for others. So there it is.

Quit your incessant whining.

Rupert
2008-09-06 23:41:59 EST
On Sep 7, 11:18 am, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> Rupert wrote:
> > On Sep 6, 6:15 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> >> Rupert wrote:
> >>> On Sep 6, 2:49 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> >>>> Rupert wrote:
> >>>>> On Sep 5, 6:47 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> When vegans attack non-vegans for the fact that their
> >>>>>> diets and lifestyles cause animal suffering and death
> >>>>>> they are reminded of the fact that so do theirs, and
> >>>>>> that their attacks are hypocritical.
> >>>>>> The vegan counter to that response has frequently been
> >>>>>> to attempt to turn the tables on the hypocrisy
> >>>>>> argument by pointing out that non-vegans also do such
> >>>>>> things as pay taxes to governments that wage immoral
> >>>>>> wars. One problem with that argument is that it misses
> >>>>>> the point of the original charge of hypocrisy.
> >>>>>> Non-vegans are not making the hypocrisy point because
> >>>>>> vegans are less than perfect in living by their
> >>>>>> principles. We all fall short of living completely
> >>>>>> according to principles, we are complicit in unfair
> >>>>>> labor practices, we support unethical politicians, use
> >>>>>> medicines tested on animals, treat ourselves to
> >>>>>> luxuries while others suffer in need, and on and on.
> >>>>>> We're imperfect, we're only human.
> >>>>>> No, the issue is not that vegans fall short of living
> >>>>>> up to their principles, that would never raise an
> >>>>>> eyebrow if it were not for the fact that they are so
> >>>>>> smug, self-righteous and hurtful in their criticisms
> >>>>>> of others who don't share the same view of the world
> >>>>>> they do. We genuinely see no difference between a one
> >>>>>> gram mouse or lizard poisoned or squashed and a
> >>>>>> two-ton steer slaughtered. If it means something to
> >>>>>> you, then by all means eat your tofu, but please, lose
> >>>>>> the judgmental attitude.
> >>>>> I'm sorry to hear you find it so hurtful. It's obviously really got to
> >>>>> you.
> >>>> It hasn't got to me, I just find it unseemly.
> >>>>> I don't believe I came on here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
> >>>>> or being "smug and self-righteous"; I simply attempted to defend a
> >>>>> point of view and got vile abuse hurled at me from day one. I haven't
> >>>>> seen any other vegans round here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
> >>>>> either.
> >>>> You didn't hear "pearl" call me a "demon" the other
> >>>> day? You tiptoe around trying to intellectualize
> >>>> everything but she is more straightforward, she calls
> >>>> enjoying meat "blood lust".
> >>> All right, fine, talk with her about it, then.
> >> I pretty much give up on her, she's a raving lunatic.
>
> >>> When I first came onto this newsgroup I responded to a post by
> >>> Harrison where he did his thing "Vegans contribute to the deaths of
> >>> animals..." Basically the point that I was trying to make is that I
> >>> didn't see the aim of veganism as being to completely stop
> >>> contributing to harm to animals, I've been aware since adolescence
> >>> that that is pretty difficult to do, however I didn't particularly
> >>> like what happened in factory farms (yes, I acknowledge that that
> >>> phrase stands in need of a precise definition) and my main motivation
> >>> in being vegan was to stop contributing to that. Instantly everyone
> >>> started ganging up on me and calling me a hypocrite. Ball called me a
> >>> liar and said I held an extreme animal rights position. It was
> >>> suggested that the collateral deaths argument showed that I should
> >>> just give up and become an omnivore again. It's really not very
> >>> bright. Ball also said that I was a sanctimonious hypocrite and that
> >>> that merited abuse. Ball has called me a "moral bankrupt" and a
> >>> "filthy shitstained hypocrite" many times over the years, and has also
> >>> more recently morally criticised me for working in China. It's
> >>> legitimate for me to investigate whether Ball adheres to the standards
> >>> of ethical integrity which he advocates for other people.
> >>> There's really nothing wrong with making an effort to reduce your
> >>> contribution to harm to animals and making some effort to encourage
> >>> others to do that as well. I expect you probably agree with that.
> >> It's something that should be done with great humility
> >> and diplomacy, most vegans do with patronizing smugness.
>
> > Well, I don't know about that. Anyway, you say that you have
> > encountered some vegans whom you find patronizing and smug; I have
> > been called a moral bankrupt and a filthy shitstained hypocrite for
> > the last six years by a man who does not adhere to the standards of
> > ethical integrity which he advocates for others. So there it is.
>
> Quit your incessant whining.

Christ, you people are lame. How is it that I am "whining" and you are
not?

Rudy Canoza
2008-09-07 00:36:56 EST
Rupert wrote:
> On Sep 7, 11:18 am, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>> Rupert wrote:
>>> On Sep 6, 6:15 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>> On Sep 6, 2:49 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sep 5, 6:47 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> When vegans attack non-vegans for the fact that their
>>>>>>>> diets and lifestyles cause animal suffering and death
>>>>>>>> they are reminded of the fact that so do theirs, and
>>>>>>>> that their attacks are hypocritical.
>>>>>>>> The vegan counter to that response has frequently been
>>>>>>>> to attempt to turn the tables on the hypocrisy
>>>>>>>> argument by pointing out that non-vegans also do such
>>>>>>>> things as pay taxes to governments that wage immoral
>>>>>>>> wars. One problem with that argument is that it misses
>>>>>>>> the point of the original charge of hypocrisy.
>>>>>>>> Non-vegans are not making the hypocrisy point because
>>>>>>>> vegans are less than perfect in living by their
>>>>>>>> principles. We all fall short of living completely
>>>>>>>> according to principles, we are complicit in unfair
>>>>>>>> labor practices, we support unethical politicians, use
>>>>>>>> medicines tested on animals, treat ourselves to
>>>>>>>> luxuries while others suffer in need, and on and on.
>>>>>>>> We're imperfect, we're only human.
>>>>>>>> No, the issue is not that vegans fall short of living
>>>>>>>> up to their principles, that would never raise an
>>>>>>>> eyebrow if it were not for the fact that they are so
>>>>>>>> smug, self-righteous and hurtful in their criticisms
>>>>>>>> of others who don't share the same view of the world
>>>>>>>> they do. We genuinely see no difference between a one
>>>>>>>> gram mouse or lizard poisoned or squashed and a
>>>>>>>> two-ton steer slaughtered. If it means something to
>>>>>>>> you, then by all means eat your tofu, but please, lose
>>>>>>>> the judgmental attitude.
>>>>>>> I'm sorry to hear you find it so hurtful. It's obviously really got to
>>>>>>> you.
>>>>>> It hasn't got to me, I just find it unseemly.
>>>>>>> I don't believe I came on here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
>>>>>>> or being "smug and self-righteous"; I simply attempted to defend a
>>>>>>> point of view and got vile abuse hurled at me from day one. I haven't
>>>>>>> seen any other vegans round here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
>>>>>>> either.
>>>>>> You didn't hear "pearl" call me a "demon" the other
>>>>>> day? You tiptoe around trying to intellectualize
>>>>>> everything but she is more straightforward, she calls
>>>>>> enjoying meat "blood lust".
>>>>> All right, fine, talk with her about it, then.
>>>> I pretty much give up on her, she's a raving lunatic.
>>>>> When I first came onto this newsgroup I responded to a post by
>>>>> Harrison where he did his thing "Vegans contribute to the deaths of
>>>>> animals..." Basically the point that I was trying to make is that I
>>>>> didn't see the aim of veganism as being to completely stop
>>>>> contributing to harm to animals, I've been aware since adolescence
>>>>> that that is pretty difficult to do, however I didn't particularly
>>>>> like what happened in factory farms (yes, I acknowledge that that
>>>>> phrase stands in need of a precise definition) and my main motivation
>>>>> in being vegan was to stop contributing to that. Instantly everyone
>>>>> started ganging up on me and calling me a hypocrite. Ball called me a
>>>>> liar and said I held an extreme animal rights position. It was
>>>>> suggested that the collateral deaths argument showed that I should
>>>>> just give up and become an omnivore again. It's really not very
>>>>> bright. Ball also said that I was a sanctimonious hypocrite and that
>>>>> that merited abuse. Ball has called me a "moral bankrupt" and a
>>>>> "filthy shitstained hypocrite" many times over the years, and has also
>>>>> more recently morally criticised me for working in China. It's
>>>>> legitimate for me to investigate whether Ball adheres to the standards
>>>>> of ethical integrity which he advocates for other people.
>>>>> There's really nothing wrong with making an effort to reduce your
>>>>> contribution to harm to animals and making some effort to encourage
>>>>> others to do that as well. I expect you probably agree with that.
>>>> It's something that should be done with great humility
>>>> and diplomacy, most vegans do with patronizing smugness.
>>> Well, I don't know about that. Anyway, you say that you have
>>> encountered some vegans whom you find patronizing and smug; I have
>>> been called a moral bankrupt and a filthy shitstained hypocrite for
>>> the last six years by a man who does not adhere to the standards of
>>> ethical integrity which he advocates for others.

No, that hasn't happened. I most certainly *do* adhere to standards of
ethical integrity that I advocate for others.

Also, you haven't been here for six years.


>> Quit your incessant whining.
>
> Christ, you people are lame. How is it that I am "whining" and you are
> not?

Rupert
2008-09-07 01:08:12 EST
On Sep 7, 12:36 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.noot> wrote:
> Rupert wrote:
> > On Sep 7, 11:18 am, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> >> Rupert wrote:
> >>> On Sep 6, 6:15 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> >>>> Rupert wrote:
> >>>>> On Sep 6, 2:49 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Rupert wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Sep 5, 6:47 pm, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> When vegans attack non-vegans for the fact that their
> >>>>>>>> diets and lifestyles cause animal suffering and death
> >>>>>>>> they are reminded of the fact that so do theirs, and
> >>>>>>>> that their attacks are hypocritical.
> >>>>>>>> The vegan counter to that response has frequently been
> >>>>>>>> to attempt to turn the tables on the hypocrisy
> >>>>>>>> argument by pointing out that non-vegans also do such
> >>>>>>>> things as pay taxes to governments that wage immoral
> >>>>>>>> wars. One problem with that argument is that it misses
> >>>>>>>> the point of the original charge of hypocrisy.
> >>>>>>>> Non-vegans are not making the hypocrisy point because
> >>>>>>>> vegans are less than perfect in living by their
> >>>>>>>> principles. We all fall short of living completely
> >>>>>>>> according to principles, we are complicit in unfair
> >>>>>>>> labor practices, we support unethical politicians, use
> >>>>>>>> medicines tested on animals, treat ourselves to
> >>>>>>>> luxuries while others suffer in need, and on and on.
> >>>>>>>> We're imperfect, we're only human.
> >>>>>>>> No, the issue is not that vegans fall short of living
> >>>>>>>> up to their principles, that would never raise an
> >>>>>>>> eyebrow if it were not for the fact that they are so
> >>>>>>>> smug, self-righteous and hurtful in their criticisms
> >>>>>>>> of others who don't share the same view of the world
> >>>>>>>> they do. We genuinely see no difference between a one
> >>>>>>>> gram mouse or lizard poisoned or squashed and a
> >>>>>>>> two-ton steer slaughtered. If it means something to
> >>>>>>>> you, then by all means eat your tofu, but please, lose
> >>>>>>>> the judgmental attitude.
> >>>>>>> I'm sorry to hear you find it so hurtful. It's obviously really got to
> >>>>>>> you.
> >>>>>> It hasn't got to me, I just find it unseemly.
> >>>>>>> I don't believe I came on here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
> >>>>>>> or being "smug and self-righteous"; I simply attempted to defend a
> >>>>>>> point of view and got vile abuse hurled at me from day one. I haven't
> >>>>>>> seen any other vegans round here expressing a "judgmental attitude"
> >>>>>>> either.
> >>>>>> You didn't hear "pearl" call me a "demon" the other
> >>>>>> day? You tiptoe around trying to intellectualize
> >>>>>> everything but she is more straightforward, she calls
> >>>>>> enjoying meat "blood lust".
> >>>>> All right, fine, talk with her about it, then.
> >>>> I pretty much give up on her, she's a raving lunatic.
> >>>>> When I first came onto this newsgroup I responded to a post by
> >>>>> Harrison where he did his thing "Vegans contribute to the deaths of
> >>>>> animals..." Basically the point that I was trying to make is that I
> >>>>> didn't see the aim of veganism as being to completely stop
> >>>>> contributing to harm to animals, I've been aware since adolescence
> >>>>> that that is pretty difficult to do, however I didn't particularly
> >>>>> like what happened in factory farms (yes, I acknowledge that that
> >>>>> phrase stands in need of a precise definition) and my main motivation
> >>>>> in being vegan was to stop contributing to that. Instantly everyone
> >>>>> started ganging up on me and calling me a hypocrite. Ball called me a
> >>>>> liar and said I held an extreme animal rights position. It was
> >>>>> suggested that the collateral deaths argument showed that I should
> >>>>> just give up and become an omnivore again. It's really not very
> >>>>> bright. Ball also said that I was a sanctimonious hypocrite and that
> >>>>> that merited abuse. Ball has called me a "moral bankrupt" and a
> >>>>> "filthy shitstained hypocrite" many times over the years, and has also
> >>>>> more recently morally criticised me for working in China. It's
> >>>>> legitimate for me to investigate whether Ball adheres to the standards
> >>>>> of ethical integrity which he advocates for other people.
> >>>>> There's really nothing wrong with making an effort to reduce your
> >>>>> contribution to harm to animals and making some effort to encourage
> >>>>> others to do that as well. I expect you probably agree with that.
> >>>> It's something that should be done with great humility
> >>>> and diplomacy, most vegans do with patronizing smugness.
> >>> Well, I don't know about that. Anyway, you say that you have
> >>> encountered some vegans whom you find patronizing and smug; I have
> >>> been called a moral bankrupt and a filthy shitstained hypocrite for
> >>> the last six years by a man who does not adhere to the standards of
> >>> ethical integrity which he advocates for others.
>
> No, that hasn't happened. I most certainly *do* adhere to standards of
> ethical integrity that I advocate for others.
>

I claim to have demonstrated the contrary in at least two ways; I am
not satisfied with your counter-arguments so far.

> Also, you haven't been here for six years.
>

You're right, not quite that long.
Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


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