Vegetarian Discussion: No Consideration For Animals' Lives

No Consideration For Animals' Lives
Posts: 28

Report Abuse

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

Page: 1 2 3   Next  (First | Last)

George Plimpton
2012-08-09 10:42:04 EST
The lying cracker, Goo Fuckwit David Harrison, continually blabbers
about having "consideration" for the lives of animals. What he means
is, he thinks it's good for the animals themselves if they exist. That's
*all* it means.

He sure as hell doesn't have one bit of consideration for their lives as
animals experience them, i.e., for their welfare. He has made that
abundantly clear over 11 years:

It's not out of consideration for porcupines
that we don't raise them for food. It's because
they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
either, but because they're fairly easy to
raise.
Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005

I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
that all of the animals I eat had terrible
lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
because I don't care about them at all, but I
would just ignore their suffering.
Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999

I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
also....
Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999

I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
to make the effort.
Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - July 31, 2003

Goo only cares about the products and services they provide - mainly
meat, but also disgusting animal combats that Goo enjoys watching.

--
Any more lip out of you and I'll haul off and let you have it...if you
know what's good for you, you won't monkey around with Fred C. Dobbs



Rupert
2012-08-09 11:03:12 EST
On 9 Aug., 16:42, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> The lying cracker, Goo Fuckwit David Harrison, continually blabbers
> about having "consideration" for the lives of animals.  What he means
> is, he thinks it's good for the animals themselves if they exist. That's
> *all* it means.
>
> He sure as hell doesn't have one bit of consideration for their lives as
> animals experience them, i.e., for their welfare.  He has made that
> abundantly clear over 11 years:
>
>          It's not out of consideration for porcupines
>          that we don't raise them for food. It's because
>          they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
>          don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
>          either, but because they're fairly easy to
>          raise.
>          Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005
>
>          I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
>          that all of the animals I eat had terrible
>          lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
>          because I don't care about them at all, but I
>          would just ignore their suffering.
>          Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999
>
>          I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
>          cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
>          the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
>          But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
>          also....
>          Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999
>
>          I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
>          to make the effort.
>          Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - July 31, 2003
>
> Goo only cares about the products and services they provide - mainly
> meat, but also disgusting animal combats that Goo enjoys watching.
>
> --
> Any more lip out of you and I'll haul off and let you have it...if you
> know what's good for you, you won't monkey around with Fred C. Dobbs

You've made the same post three times in one week, in the same thread.

George Plimpton
2012-08-09 11:35:27 EST
On 8/9/2012 8:03 AM, Rupert wrote:
> On 9 Aug., 16:42, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>> The lying cracker, Goo Fuckwit David Harrison, continually blabbers
>> about having "consideration" for the lives of animals. What he means
>> is, he thinks it's good for the animals themselves if they exist. That's
>> *all* it means.
>>
>> He sure as hell doesn't have one bit of consideration for their lives as
>> animals experience them, i.e., for their welfare. He has made that
>> abundantly clear over 11 years:
>>
>> It's not out of consideration for porcupines
>> that we don't raise them for food. It's because
>> they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
>> don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
>> either, but because they're fairly easy to
>> raise.
>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005
>>
>> I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
>> that all of the animals I eat had terrible
>> lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
>> because I don't care about them at all, but I
>> would just ignore their suffering.
>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999
>>
>> I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
>> cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
>> the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
>> But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
>> also....
>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999
>>
>> I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
>> to make the effort.
>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - July 31, 2003
>>
>> Goo only cares about the products and services they provide - mainly
>> meat, but also disgusting animal combats that Goo enjoys watching.
>>
>> --
>> Any more lip out of you and I'll haul off and let you have it...if you
>> know what's good for you, you won't monkey around with Fred C. Dobbs
>
> You've made the same post three times in one week, in the same thread.

That's false.


Rupert
2012-08-09 11:36:52 EST
On 9 Aug., 17:35, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> On 8/9/2012 8:03 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 9 Aug., 16:42, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >> The lying cracker, Goo Fuckwit David Harrison, continually blabbers
> >> about having "consideration" for the lives of animals.  What he means
> >> is, he thinks it's good for the animals themselves if they exist. That's
> >> *all* it means.
>
> >> He sure as hell doesn't have one bit of consideration for their lives as
> >> animals experience them, i.e., for their welfare.  He has made that
> >> abundantly clear over 11 years:
>
> >>           It's not out of consideration for porcupines
> >>           that we don't raise them for food. It's because
> >>           they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
> >>           don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
> >>           either, but because they're fairly easy to
> >>           raise.
> >>           Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005
>
> >>           I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
> >>           that all of the animals I eat had terrible
> >>           lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
> >>           because I don't care about them at all, but I
> >>           would just ignore their suffering.
> >>           Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999
>
> >>           I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
> >>           cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
> >>           the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
> >>           But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
> >>           also....
> >>           Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999
>
> >>           I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
> >>           to make the effort.
> >>           Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - July 31, 2003
>
> >> Goo only cares about the products and services they provide - mainly
> >> meat, but also disgusting animal combats that Goo enjoys watching.
>
> >> --
> >> Any more lip out of you and I'll haul off and let you have it...if you
> >> know what's good for you, you won't monkey around with Fred C. Dobbs
>
> > You've made the same post three times in one week, in the same thread.
>
> That's false.

Is that so, now.

George Plimpton
2012-08-09 11:54:41 EST
On 8/9/2012 8:36 AM, Rupert wrote:
> On 9 Aug., 17:35, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>> On 8/9/2012 8:03 AM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 9 Aug., 16:42, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>> The lying cracker, Goo Fuckwit David Harrison, continually blabbers
>>>> about having "consideration" for the lives of animals. What he means
>>>> is, he thinks it's good for the animals themselves if they exist. That's
>>>> *all* it means.
>>
>>>> He sure as hell doesn't have one bit of consideration for their lives as
>>>> animals experience them, i.e., for their welfare. He has made that
>>>> abundantly clear over 11 years:
>>
>>>> It's not out of consideration for porcupines
>>>> that we don't raise them for food. It's because
>>>> they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
>>>> don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
>>>> either, but because they're fairly easy to
>>>> raise.
>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005
>>
>>>> I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
>>>> that all of the animals I eat had terrible
>>>> lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
>>>> because I don't care about them at all, but I
>>>> would just ignore their suffering.
>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999
>>
>>>> I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
>>>> cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
>>>> the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
>>>> But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
>>>> also....
>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999
>>
>>>> I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
>>>> to make the effort.
>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - July 31, 2003
>>
>>>> Goo only cares about the products and services they provide - mainly
>>>> meat, but also disgusting animal combats that Goo enjoys watching.
>>
>>>> --
>>>> Any more lip out of you and I'll haul off and let you have it...if you
>>>> know what's good for you, you won't monkey around with Fred C. Dobbs
>>
>>> You've made the same post three times in one week, in the same thread.
>>
>> That's false.
>
> Is that so, now.

Yep.


Rupert
2012-08-09 11:57:16 EST
On 9 Aug., 17:54, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> On 8/9/2012 8:36 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 9 Aug., 17:35, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >> On 8/9/2012 8:03 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>> On 9 Aug., 16:42, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >>>> The lying cracker, Goo Fuckwit David Harrison, continually blabbers
> >>>> about having "consideration" for the lives of animals.  What he means
> >>>> is, he thinks it's good for the animals themselves if they exist. That's
> >>>> *all* it means.
>
> >>>> He sure as hell doesn't have one bit of consideration for their lives as
> >>>> animals experience them, i.e., for their welfare.  He has made that
> >>>> abundantly clear over 11 years:
>
> >>>>            It's not out of consideration for porcupines
> >>>>            that we don't raise them for food. It's because
> >>>>            they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
> >>>>            don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
> >>>>            either, but because they're fairly easy to
> >>>>            raise.
> >>>>            Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005
>
> >>>>            I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
> >>>>            that all of the animals I eat had terrible
> >>>>            lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
> >>>>            because I don't care about them at all, but I
> >>>>            would just ignore their suffering.
> >>>>            Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999
>
> >>>>            I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
> >>>>            cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
> >>>>            the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
> >>>>            But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
> >>>>            also....
> >>>>            Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999
>
> >>>>            I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
> >>>>            to make the effort.
> >>>>            Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - July 31, 2003
>
> >>>> Goo only cares about the products and services they provide - mainly
> >>>> meat, but also disgusting animal combats that Goo enjoys watching.
>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Any more lip out of you and I'll haul off and let you have it...if you
> >>>> know what's good for you, you won't monkey around with Fred C. Dobbs
>
> >>> You've made the same post three times in one week, in the same thread.
>
> >> That's false.
>
> > Is that so, now.
>
> Yep.

Are these three posts yours?


https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/ec918507821fa4a9?hl=de&dmode=source
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/a8e9e8c2113c4d7e?hl=de&dmode=source
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/309f5f3d7a3f0491?hl=de&dmode=source

George Plimpton
2012-08-09 12:48:52 EST
On 8/9/2012 8:57 AM, Rupert wrote:
> On 9 Aug., 17:54, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>> On 8/9/2012 8:36 AM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 9 Aug., 17:35, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>> On 8/9/2012 8:03 AM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>>>> On 9 Aug., 16:42, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>>>> The lying cracker, Goo Fuckwit David Harrison, continually blabbers
>>>>>> about having "consideration" for the lives of animals. What he means
>>>>>> is, he thinks it's good for the animals themselves if they exist. That's
>>>>>> *all* it means.
>>
>>>>>> He sure as hell doesn't have one bit of consideration for their lives as
>>>>>> animals experience them, i.e., for their welfare. He has made that
>>>>>> abundantly clear over 11 years:
>>
>>>>>> It's not out of consideration for porcupines
>>>>>> that we don't raise them for food. It's because
>>>>>> they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
>>>>>> don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
>>>>>> either, but because they're fairly easy to
>>>>>> raise.
>>>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005
>>
>>>>>> I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
>>>>>> that all of the animals I eat had terrible
>>>>>> lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
>>>>>> because I don't care about them at all, but I
>>>>>> would just ignore their suffering.
>>>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999
>>
>>>>>> I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
>>>>>> cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
>>>>>> the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
>>>>>> But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
>>>>>> also....
>>>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999
>>
>>>>>> I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
>>>>>> to make the effort.
>>>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - July 31, 2003
>>
>>>>>> Goo only cares about the products and services they provide - mainly
>>>>>> meat, but also disgusting animal combats that Goo enjoys watching.
>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Any more lip out of you and I'll haul off and let you have it...if you
>>>>>> know what's good for you, you won't monkey around with Fred C. Dobbs
>>
>>>>> You've made the same post three times in one week, in the same thread.
>>
>>>> That's false.
>>
>>> Is that so, now.
>>
>> Yep.
>
> Are these three posts yours?
>
>
> https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/ec918507821fa4a9?hl=de&dmode=source
> https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/a8e9e8c2113c4d7e?hl=de&dmode=source
> https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/309f5f3d7a3f0491?hl=de&dmode=source
>

One of those posts, from today, is by George Plimpton. The other two
are by Delma Ivey. The earlier of Mr. Ivey's posts is from 2 August.
Today is 9 August. You claimed "You've made the same post three times
in one week..." Eight days is more than a week.

Rupert
2012-08-09 14:27:47 EST
On aug. 9, 18:48, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> On 8/9/2012 8:57 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 9 Aug., 17:54, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >> On 8/9/2012 8:36 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>> On 9 Aug., 17:35, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >>>> On 8/9/2012 8:03 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>>>> On 9 Aug., 16:42, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >>>>>> The lying cracker, Goo Fuckwit David Harrison, continually blabbers
> >>>>>> about having "consideration" for the lives of animals.  What he means
> >>>>>> is, he thinks it's good for the animals themselves if they exist. That's
> >>>>>> *all* it means.
>
> >>>>>> He sure as hell doesn't have one bit of consideration for their lives as
> >>>>>> animals experience them, i.e., for their welfare.  He has made that
> >>>>>> abundantly clear over 11 years:
>
> >>>>>>             It's not out of consideration for porcupines
> >>>>>>             that we don't raise them for food. It's because
> >>>>>>             they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
> >>>>>>             don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
> >>>>>>             either, but because they're fairly easy to
> >>>>>>             raise.
> >>>>>>             Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005
>
> >>>>>>             I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
> >>>>>>             that all of the animals I eat had terrible
> >>>>>>             lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
> >>>>>>             because I don't care about them at all, but I
> >>>>>>             would just ignore their suffering.
> >>>>>>             Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999
>
> >>>>>>             I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
> >>>>>>             cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
> >>>>>>             the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
> >>>>>>             But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
> >>>>>>             also....
> >>>>>>             Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999
>
> >>>>>>             I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
> >>>>>>             to make the effort.
> >>>>>>             Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - July 31, 2003
>
> >>>>>> Goo only cares about the products and services they provide - mainly
> >>>>>> meat, but also disgusting animal combats that Goo enjoys watching.
>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Any more lip out of you and I'll haul off and let you have it...if you
> >>>>>> know what's good for you, you won't monkey around with Fred C. Dobbs
>
> >>>>> You've made the same post three times in one week, in the same thread.
>
> >>>> That's false.
>
> >>> Is that so, now.
>
> >> Yep.
>
> > Are these three posts yours?
>
> >https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/ec9...
> >https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/a8e...
> >https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/309...
>
> One of those posts, from today, is by George Plimpton.  The other two
> are by Delma Ivey.  The earlier of Mr. Ivey's posts is from 2 August.
> Today is 9 August.  You claimed "You've made the same post three times
> in one week..."  Eight days is more than a week.

The post on 2 August is Aug. 2, 22.44. The post on 9 August is Aug. 9,
16.42. The time interval between the two posts is less than one week.

It is farcical for you to claim that you are not the same person as
Delma Ivey.

You really are very funny.

George Plimpton
2012-08-09 15:01:53 EST
On 8/9/2012 11:27 AM, Rupert wrote:
> On aug. 9, 18:48, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>> On 8/9/2012 8:57 AM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 9 Aug., 17:54, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>> On 8/9/2012 8:36 AM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>>>> On 9 Aug., 17:35, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/9/2012 8:03 AM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> On 9 Aug., 16:42, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>>>>>> The lying cracker, Goo Fuckwit David Harrison, continually blabbers
>>>>>>>> about having "consideration" for the lives of animals. What he means
>>>>>>>> is, he thinks it's good for the animals themselves if they exist. That's
>>>>>>>> *all* it means.
>>
>>>>>>>> He sure as hell doesn't have one bit of consideration for their lives as
>>>>>>>> animals experience them, i.e., for their welfare. He has made that
>>>>>>>> abundantly clear over 11 years:
>>
>>>>>>>> It's not out of consideration for porcupines
>>>>>>>> that we don't raise them for food. It's because
>>>>>>>> they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
>>>>>>>> don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
>>>>>>>> either, but because they're fairly easy to
>>>>>>>> raise.
>>>>>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005
>>
>>>>>>>> I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
>>>>>>>> that all of the animals I eat had terrible
>>>>>>>> lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
>>>>>>>> because I don't care about them at all, but I
>>>>>>>> would just ignore their suffering.
>>>>>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999
>>
>>>>>>>> I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
>>>>>>>> cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
>>>>>>>> the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
>>>>>>>> But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
>>>>>>>> also....
>>>>>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999
>>
>>>>>>>> I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
>>>>>>>> to make the effort.
>>>>>>>> Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - July 31, 2003
>>
>>>>>>>> Goo only cares about the products and services they provide - mainly
>>>>>>>> meat, but also disgusting animal combats that Goo enjoys watching.
>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Any more lip out of you and I'll haul off and let you have it...if you
>>>>>>>> know what's good for you, you won't monkey around with Fred C. Dobbs
>>
>>>>>>> You've made the same post three times in one week, in the same thread.
>>
>>>>>> That's false.
>>
>>>>> Is that so, now.
>>
>>>> Yep.
>>
>>> Are these three posts yours?
>>
>>> https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/ec9...
>>> https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/a8e...
>>> https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/309...
>>
>> One of those posts, from today, is by George Plimpton. The other two
>> are by Delma Ivey. The earlier of Mr. Ivey's posts is from 2 August.
>> Today is 9 August. You claimed "You've made the same post three times
>> in one week..." Eight days is more than a week.
>
> The post on 2 August is Aug. 2, 22.44. The post on 9 August is Aug. 9,
> 16.42. The time interval between the two posts is less than one week.

A week is seven days, including the endpoints. A week including 2 Aug
would end on 8 Aug. 9 Aug would not be included in that week.



Rupert
2012-08-10 04:30:11 EST
On aug. 9, 21:01, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> On 8/9/2012 11:27 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On aug. 9, 18:48, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >> On 8/9/2012 8:57 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>> On 9 Aug., 17:54, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >>>> On 8/9/2012 8:36 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>>>> On 9 Aug., 17:35, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >>>>>> On 8/9/2012 8:03 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> On 9 Aug., 16:42, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> The lying cracker, Goo Fuckwit David Harrison, continually blabbers
> >>>>>>>> about having "consideration" for the lives of animals.  What he means
> >>>>>>>> is, he thinks it's good for the animals themselves if they exist. That's
> >>>>>>>> *all* it means.
>
> >>>>>>>> He sure as hell doesn't have one bit of consideration for their lives as
> >>>>>>>> animals experience them, i.e., for their welfare.  He has made that
> >>>>>>>> abundantly clear over 11 years:
>
> >>>>>>>>              It's not out of consideration for porcupines
> >>>>>>>>              that we don't raise them for food. It's because
> >>>>>>>>              they would be a pain in the ass to raise. We
> >>>>>>>>              don't raise cattle out of consideration for them
> >>>>>>>>              either, but because they're fairly easy to
> >>>>>>>>              raise.
> >>>>>>>>              Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sep 26, 2005
>
> >>>>>>>>              I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
> >>>>>>>>              that all of the animals I eat had terrible
> >>>>>>>>              lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
> >>>>>>>>              because I don't care about them at all, but I
> >>>>>>>>              would just ignore their suffering.
> >>>>>>>>              Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999
>
> >>>>>>>>              I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
> >>>>>>>>              cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
> >>>>>>>>              the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
> >>>>>>>>              But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
> >>>>>>>>              also....
> >>>>>>>>              Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999
>
> >>>>>>>>              I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care enough
> >>>>>>>>              to make the effort.
> >>>>>>>>              Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - July 31, 2003
>
> >>>>>>>> Goo only cares about the products and services they provide - mainly
> >>>>>>>> meat, but also disgusting animal combats that Goo enjoys watching.
>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Any more lip out of you and I'll haul off and let you have it...if you
> >>>>>>>> know what's good for you, you won't monkey around with Fred C. Dobbs
>
> >>>>>>> You've made the same post three times in one week, in the same thread.
>
> >>>>>> That's false.
>
> >>>>> Is that so, now.
>
> >>>> Yep.
>
> >>> Are these three posts yours?
>
> >>>https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/ec9...
> >>>https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/a8e...
> >>>https://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/309...
>
> >> One of those posts, from today, is by George Plimpton.  The other two
> >> are by Delma Ivey.  The earlier of Mr. Ivey's posts is from 2 August.
> >> Today is 9 August.  You claimed "You've made the same post three times
> >> in one week..."  Eight days is more than a week.
>
> > The post on 2 August is Aug. 2, 22.44. The post on 9 August is Aug. 9,
> > 16.42. The time interval between the two posts is less than one week.
>
> A week is seven days, including the endpoints.  A week including 2 Aug
> would end on 8 Aug.  9 Aug would not be included in that week.

No, 2+7=9. A week starting on 2 August, 22.44 (German time, one hour
ahead of GMT) would end on 9 August, 22.44 (German time).
Page: 1 2 3   Next  (First | Last)


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