Vegetarian Discussion: Vegetarians Are Intolerant PC Speech-suppressers

Vegetarians Are Intolerant PC Speech-suppressers
Posts: 17

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)

Rudy Canoza
2008-10-18 12:03:36 EST
Story about a visiting fellow at a UK university who had all his
computer privileges revoked because of some tongue-in-cheek comments he
made about vegetarians:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/12/newcastle_veggie_site/

Vegetarians are intolerant bigoted extremists. This is not really news.

Dutch
2008-10-18 16:07:47 EST
"Rudy Canoza" <pipes@thedismalscience.noot> wrote
> Story about a visiting fellow at a UK university who had all his computer
> privileges revoked because of some tongue-in-cheek comments he made about
> vegetarians:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/12/newcastle_veggie_site/
>
> Vegetarians are intolerant bigoted extremists. This is not really news.

That is very chilling that he would be banned for expressing this opinion,
especially considering the fact that the piece in question is very
thoughtful and well reasoned.
http://www.hyperactive-stage.co.uk/blog/comments.asp?ref=196
The title "Why vegetarians should be force fed with lard" is, as you say,
tongue in cheek humour.


Dutch
2008-10-18 16:09:30 EST
"Rudy Canoza" <pipes@thedismalscience.noot> wrote
> Story about a visiting fellow at a UK university who had all his computer
> privileges revoked because of some tongue-in-cheek comments he made about
> vegetarians:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/12/newcastle_veggie_site/
>
> Vegetarians are intolerant bigoted extremists. This is not really news.

That is very chilling that he would be banned for expressing this opinion,
especially considering the fact that the piece in question is very
thoughtful and well reasoned.
http://www.hyperactive-stage.co.uk/blog/comments.asp?ref=196
The title "Why vegetarians should be force fed with lard" is, as you say,
tongue in cheek humour.


Rudy Canoza
2008-10-18 23:49:40 EST
Dutch wrote:
> "Rudy Canoza" <pipes@thedismalscience.noot> wrote
>> Story about a visiting fellow at a UK university who had all his
>> computer privileges revoked because of some tongue-in-cheek comments
>> he made about vegetarians:
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/12/newcastle_veggie_site/
>>
>> Vegetarians are intolerant bigoted extremists. This is not really news.
>
> That is very chilling that he would be banned for expressing this
> opinion, especially considering the fact that the piece in question is
> very thoughtful and well reasoned.
> http://www.hyperactive-stage.co.uk/blog/comments.asp?ref=196
> The title "Why vegetarians should be force fed with lard" is, as you
> say, tongue in cheek humour.

Even if his opinion had been more overtly hostile toward vegetarianism
and vegetarians, it still would have been outrageous, and a capitulation
to radical extremists, for the university not only to take down the
page, but to cancel his computer privileges entirely. But what is not
at all surprising is that the vegetarians mounted a concerted effort to
suppress someone's speech. They are totalitarians, in thought and in deed.

Rupert
2008-10-19 04:02:45 EST
On Oct 18, 8:07 pm, "Dutch" <n...@email.com> wrote:
> "Rudy Canoza" <pi...@thedismalscience.noot> wrote
>
> > Story about a visiting fellow at a UK university who had all his computer
> > privileges revoked because of some tongue-in-cheek comments he made about
> > vegetarians:
> >http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/12/newcastle_veggie_site/
>
> > Vegetarians are intolerant bigoted extremists. This is not really news.
>
> That is very chilling that he would be banned for expressing this opinion,
> especially considering the fact that the piece in question is very
> thoughtful and well reasoned.http://www.hyperactive-stage.co.uk/blog/comments.asp?ref=196
> The title "Why vegetarians should be force fed with lard" is, as you say,
> tongue in cheek humour.

The essay is a piece of crap, however it clearly is a genuine attempt
at engaging in reasoned argument for a sincerely held position and as
you both say it's totally outrageous that his IT privileges were
revoked. I will write to the university and tell them that I am a
vegan and that the stupid essay does not bother me in the least, but
their lack of respect for freedom of speech bothers me greatly.

Rupert
2008-10-19 04:07:01 EST
On Oct 19, 3:49 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.noot> wrote:
> Dutch wrote:
> > "Rudy Canoza" <pi...@thedismalscience.noot> wrote
> >> Story about a visiting fellow at a UK university who had all his
> >> computer privileges revoked because of some tongue-in-cheek comments
> >> he made about vegetarians:
> >>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/12/newcastle_veggie_site/
>
> >> Vegetarians are intolerant bigoted extremists. This is not really news.
>
> > That is very chilling that he would be banned for expressing this
> > opinion, especially considering the fact that the piece in question is
> > very thoughtful and well reasoned.
> >http://www.hyperactive-stage.co.uk/blog/comments.asp?ref=196
> > The title "Why vegetarians should be force fed with lard" is, as you
> > say, tongue in cheek humour.
>
> Even if his opinion had been more overtly hostile toward vegetarianism
> and vegetarians, it still would have been outrageous, and a capitulation
> to radical extremists, for the university not only to take down the
> page, but to cancel his computer privileges entirely.

Correct.

> But what is not
> at all surprising is that the vegetarians mounted a concerted effort to
> suppress someone's speech. They are totalitarians, in thought and in deed.

You've got no basis for making that ridiculous generalisation, you
stupid clown; you're just giving voice to your mindless bigotry as
usual. If you want to talk about freedom of speech, then how about the
fact that my friend Angie had to attend court hearings for a seven-
figure lawsuit because she handed out a few leaflets about mulesing,
and the fact that we're not allowed to publicly call for a boycott of
battery cage eggs?

Stop worrying about the mote in your brother's eye and pay some
attention to the beam in your own. Stop supporting the government of
your country harming poor foreigners by preventing them peacefully
entering your country and working for people who are willing to employ
them. When you've publicly stood out against this practice then you'll
have the right to comment on who's "totalitarian".

D*@.
2008-10-19 10:06:35 EST
On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 01:07:01 -0700 (PDT), Rupert <rupertmccallum@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Oct 19, 3:49 am, Goo wrote:
>> Dutch wrote:
>> > Goo wrote
>> >> Story about a visiting fellow at a UK university who had all his
>> >> computer privileges revoked because of some tongue-in-cheek comments
>> >> he made about vegetarians:
>> >>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/12/newcastle_veggie_site/
>>
>> >> Vegetarians are intolerant bigoted extremists. This is not really news.
>>
>> > That is very chilling that he would be banned for expressing this
>> > opinion, especially considering the fact that the piece in question is
>> > very thoughtful and well reasoned.
>> >http://www.hyperactive-stage.co.uk/blog/comments.asp?ref=196
>> > The title "Why vegetarians should be force fed with lard" is, as you
>> > say, tongue in cheek humour.
>>
>> Even if his opinion had been more overtly hostile toward vegetarianism
>> and vegetarians, it still would have been outrageous, and a capitulation
>> to radical extremists, for the university not only to take down the
>> page, but to cancel his computer privileges entirely.
>
>Correct.
>
>> But what is not
>> at all surprising is that the vegetarians mounted a concerted effort to
>> suppress someone's speech. They are totalitarians, in thought and in deed.
>
>You've got no basis for making that ridiculous generalisation, you
>stupid clown; you're just giving voice to your mindless bigotry as
>usual. If you want to talk about freedom of speech, then how about the
>fact that my friend Angie had to attend court hearings for a seven-
>figure lawsuit because she handed out a few leaflets about mulesing,
>and the fact that we're not allowed to publicly call for a boycott of
>battery cage eggs?

It might be better to point out the difference and encourage
people to buy cage free. They don't even have to be free range,
for reasons I explained in the past.

Rudy Canoza
2008-10-19 12:52:00 EST
Rupert wrote:
> On Oct 18, 8:07 pm, "Dutch" <n...@email.com> wrote:
>> "Rudy Canoza" <pi...@thedismalscience.noot> wrote
>>
>>> Story about a visiting fellow at a UK university who had all his computer
>>> privileges revoked because of some tongue-in-cheek comments he made about
>>> vegetarians:
>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/12/newcastle_veggie_site/
>>> Vegetarians are intolerant bigoted extremists. This is not really news.
>> That is very chilling that he would be banned for expressing this opinion,
>> especially considering the fact that the piece in question is very
>> thoughtful and well reasoned.http://www.hyperactive-stage.co.uk/blog/comments.asp?ref=196
>> The title "Why vegetarians should be force fed with lard" is, as you say,
>> tongue in cheek humour.
>
> The essay is a piece of crap,

You just don't like it because it ridicules you. In fact, it was a
reasonably good humor piece - not world class or timeless, but decent.


> however it clearly is a genuine attempt
> at engaging in reasoned argument for a sincerely held position and as
> you both say it's totally outrageous that his IT privileges were
> revoked. I will write to the university and tell them that I am a
> vegan and that the stupid essay does not bother me in the least, but
> their lack of respect for freedom of speech bothers me greatly.

Please post their reply here.

Rudy Canoza
2008-10-19 12:56:01 EST
Rupert wrote:
> On Oct 19, 3:49 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.noot> wrote:
>> Dutch wrote:
>>> "Rudy Canoza" <pi...@thedismalscience.noot> wrote
>>>> Story about a visiting fellow at a UK university who had all his
>>>> computer privileges revoked because of some tongue-in-cheek comments
>>>> he made about vegetarians:
>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/12/newcastle_veggie_site/
>>>> Vegetarians are intolerant bigoted extremists. This is not really news.
>>> That is very chilling that he would be banned for expressing this
>>> opinion, especially considering the fact that the piece in question is
>>> very thoughtful and well reasoned.
>>> http://www.hyperactive-stage.co.uk/blog/comments.asp?ref=196
>>> The title "Why vegetarians should be force fed with lard" is, as you
>>> say, tongue in cheek humour.
>> Even if his opinion had been more overtly hostile toward vegetarianism
>> and vegetarians, it still would have been outrageous, and a capitulation
>> to radical extremists, for the university not only to take down the
>> page, but to cancel his computer privileges entirely.
>
> Correct.

But it was *just* as outrageous for the "vegan" fainéants to demand that
the page be taken down in the first place.


>
>> But what is not
>> at all surprising is that the vegetarians mounted a concerted effort to
>> suppress someone's speech. They are totalitarians, in thought and in deed.
>
> You've got no basis for making that ridiculous generalisation,

Yes, I have.


> fact that my friend Angie had to attend court hearings for a seven-
> figure lawsuit because she handed out a few leaflets about mulesing,

I doubt that was the reason - "merely" handing out leaflets. If the
leaflets were libelous or defamatory, then she /should/ have to answer
for it. BTW, isn't this cunt "Angie" the same one who dutifully
revealed the contents of Derek's e-mails to you, but then said that the
list of directors of her band of terrorists was "confidential"?


> and the fact that we're not allowed to publicly call for a boycott of
> battery cage eggs?

I doubt that that's the case, either.


> Stop worrying about the mote in your brother's eye and pay some
> attention to the beam in your own.

No such beam.

Vegetarians, especially "vegans", are intolerant speech-suppressing
totalitarians.

Rudy Canoza
2008-10-19 12:59:15 EST
Goo - aka "Bumper", aka Fuckwit David Harrison, Stupidist SPAMMER,
stupid pig-fucking cracker, cockfighting specialist - woke up and said,
"How can I be even *more* stupid today than I was yesterday?", and so he
lied:

> On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 01:07:01 -0700 (PDT), Rupert <rupertmccallum@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 19, 3:49 am, Rudy M. Canoza wrote:
>>> Dutch wrote:
>>>> Rudy G. Canoza wrote
>>>>> Story about a visiting fellow at a UK university who had all his
>>>>> computer privileges revoked because of some tongue-in-cheek comments
>>>>> he made about vegetarians:
>>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/12/newcastle_veggie_site/
>>>>> Vegetarians are intolerant bigoted extremists. This is not really news.
>>>> That is very chilling that he would be banned for expressing this
>>>> opinion, especially considering the fact that the piece in question is
>>>> very thoughtful and well reasoned.
>>>> http://www.hyperactive-stage.co.uk/blog/comments.asp?ref=196
>>>> The title "Why vegetarians should be force fed with lard" is, as you
>>>> say, tongue in cheek humour.
>>> Even if his opinion had been more overtly hostile toward vegetarianism
>>> and vegetarians, it still would have been outrageous, and a capitulation
>>> to radical extremists, for the university not only to take down the
>>> page, but to cancel his computer privileges entirely.
>> Correct.
>>
>>> But what is not
>>> at all surprising is that the vegetarians mounted a concerted effort to
>>> suppress someone's speech. They are totalitarians, in thought and in deed.
>> You've got no basis for making that ridiculous generalisation, you
>> stupid clown; you're just giving voice to your mindless bigotry as
>> usual. If you want to talk about freedom of speech, then how about the
>> fact that my friend Angie had to attend court hearings for a seven-
>> figure lawsuit because she handed out a few leaflets about mulesing,
>> and the fact that we're not allowed to publicly call for a boycott of
>> battery cage eggs?
>
> It might be better to point out the difference and encourage
> people to buy cage free.

It's better to point out that no one has any obligation to cause animals
to live in the first place.
Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


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