Vegetarian Discussion: No Case

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)

George Plimpton
2012-12-18 14:18:19 EST
Goo Fuckwit Harrison - he never had a case to make. He's spewed empty
bullshit for 14 years.

What a stupid, worthless cracker.

Rupert
2012-12-18 14:47:20 EST
On 18 Dez., 20:18, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> Goo Fuckwit Harrison - he never had a case to make.  He's spewed empty
> bullshit for 14 years.
>
> What a stupid, worthless cracker.

What an incredibly pointless and boring post.

George Plimpton
2012-12-18 15:26:58 EST
On 12/18/2012 11:47 AM, Rupert wrote:
> On 18 Dez., 20:18, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>> Goo Fuckwit Harrison - he never had a case to make. He's spewed empty
>> bullshit for 14 years.
>>
>> What a stupid, worthless cracker.
>
> What an incredibly pointless and boring post.

No, both characterizations are false.

Mr.Smartypants
2012-12-18 23:38:28 EST
On Dec 18, 1:26 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> On 12/18/2012 11:47 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> > On 18 Dez., 20:18, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >> Goo Fuckwit Harrison - he never had a case to make.  He's spewed empty
> >> bullshit for 14 years.
>
> >> What a stupid, worthless cracker.
>
> > What an incredibly pointless and boring post.
>
> No, both characterizations are false.


how many Ruperts do you think you're talking to now, Goo?

Rupert
2012-12-19 03:42:29 EST
On Dec 18, 9:26 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> On 12/18/2012 11:47 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> > On 18 Dez., 20:18, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >> Goo Fuckwit Harrison - he never had a case to make.  He's spewed empty
> >> bullshit for 14 years.
>
> >> What a stupid, worthless cracker.
>
> > What an incredibly pointless and boring post.
>
> No, both characterizations are false.

So what was the point of the post, and who found it scintillating?

D*@.
2012-12-20 17:43:37 EST
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 11:47:20 -0800 (PST), Rupert <rupertmccallum@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On 18 Dez., 20:18, Goo wrote:
>> Goo Fuckwit Harrison - he never had a case to make.  He's spewed empty
>> bullshit for 14 years.
>>
>> What a stupid, worthless cracker.
>
>What an incredibly pointless and boring post.

Especially from someone who can't present his own supposed "case" even when
challenged directly to try doing so. We have no examples of Goo opposing
elimination, but we do have examples of him encouraging its acceptance:

""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of
their deaths" - Goo

"the nutritionally unnecessary choice deliberately to kill an animal
ALWAYS causes a moral harm greater in magnitude than . . . the
moral "benefit" realized by the animal in existing at all" - Goo

"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude
than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo

"The meaningless fact-lette that farm animals "get to
experience life" deserves no consideration when asking
whether or not it is moral to kill them. Zero." - Goo

"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing
of the animals erases all of it." - Goo

"you MUST believe that it makes moral sense not to raise the
animals as the only way to prevent the harm that results from
killing them." - Goo

"Humans could change it. They could change it by ending it." - Goo

"There is no "selfishness" involved in wanting farm animals not to
exist as a step towards creating a more just world." - Goo

George Plimpton
2012-12-20 18:09:49 EST
On 12/20/2012 2:43 PM, dh@. wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 11:47:20 -0800 (PST), Rupert <rupertmccallum@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 18 Dez., 20:18, Goo wrote:
>>> Goo Fuckwit Harrison - he never had a case to make. He's spewed empty
>>> bullshit for 14 years.
>>>
>>> What a stupid, worthless cracker.
>>
>> What an incredibly pointless and boring post.
>
> Especially

It is *especially* true that you have no case.


D*@.
2012-12-24 16:24:12 EST
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 15:09:49 -0800, Goo agreed with dh:

>On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:43:37 -0500, dh@. wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 11:47:20 -0800 (PST), Rupert <rupertmccallum@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On 18 Dez., 20:18, Goo wrote:
>>>> Goo Fuckwit Harrison - he never had a case to make.  He's spewed empty
>>>> bullshit for 14 years.
>>>>
>>>> What a stupid, worthless cracker.
>>>
>>>What an incredibly pointless and boring post.
>>
>> Especially from someone who can't present his own supposed "case" even when
>>challenged directly to try doing so.
>
>It is *especially* true

However Goober, here's giving you another chance to show you're not lying
about your position as you so clearly appear to be. Rupert challenged you
several times to present your opposition to elimination and afaik you never were
able to present anything Goo, but if you think you did then present it again
now. Go:

>> We have no examples of Goo opposing
>>elimination, but we do have examples of him encouraging its acceptance:
>>
>>""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of
>>their deaths" - Goo
>>
>>"the nutritionally unnecessary choice deliberately to kill an animal
>>ALWAYS causes a moral harm greater in magnitude than . . . the
>>moral "benefit" realized by the animal in existing at all" - Goo
>>
>>"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude
>>than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo
>>
>>"The meaningless fact-lette that farm animals "get to
>>experience life" deserves no consideration when asking
>>whether or not it is moral to kill them. Zero." - Goo
>>
>>"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing
>>of the animals erases all of it." - Goo
>>
>>"you MUST believe that it makes moral sense not to raise the
>>animals as the only way to prevent the harm that results from
>>killing them." - Goo
>>
>>"Humans could change it. They could change it by ending it." - Goo
>>
>>"There is no "selfishness" involved in wanting farm animals not to
>>exist as a step towards creating a more just world." - Goo

George Plimpton
2012-12-25 02:58:04 EST
On 12/24/2012 1:24 PM, Fuckwit David Harrison - convicted felon - lied:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 15:09:49 -0800, George Plimpton slapped Fuckwit silly:
>
>> On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:43:37 -0500, Fuckwit David Harrison - convicted felon - lied:
>>
>>> On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 11:47:20 -0800 (PST), Rupert <rupertmccallum@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18 Dez., 20:18, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>>> Goo Fuckwit Harrison - he never had a case to make. He's spewed empty
>>>>> bullshit for 14 years.
>>>>>
>>>>> What a stupid, worthless cracker.
>>>>
>>>> What an incredibly pointless and boring post.
>>>
>>> Especially
>>
>> It is *especially* true that you have no case.
>
> However

You have no case, *Goo*. You have no legitimately moral objection to "ar".


D*@.
2012-12-27 15:09:56 EST
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 23:58:04 -0800, Goo confirmed dh's prediction:

>On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:24:12 -0500, dh@. wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 15:09:49 -0800, Goo agreed with dh:
>>
>>>On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:43:37 -0500, dh@. wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 11:47:20 -0800 (PST), Rupert <rupertmccallum@yahoo.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 18 Dez., 20:18, Goo wrote:
>>>>>> Goo Fuckwit Harrison - he never had a case to make.  He's spewed empty
>>>>>> bullshit for 14 years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What a stupid, worthless cracker.
>>>>>
>>>>>What an incredibly pointless and boring post.
>>>>
>>>> Especially from someone who can't present his own supposed "case" even when
>>>>challenged directly to try doing so.
>>>
>>>It is *especially* true
>>
>> However Goober, here's giving you another chance to show you're not lying
>>about your position as you so clearly appear to be. Rupert challenged you
>>several times to present your opposition to elimination and afaik you never were
>>able to present anything Goo, but if you think you did then present it again
>>now. Go:
>
>You have no case, Goo.

As I predicted and you confirmed you couldn't present anything to him Goo
just as you couldn't when I challenged you to try. All we have are examples of
you encouraging its acceptance Goo, with no attempt at opposition.

>>>> We have no examples of Goo opposing
>>>>elimination, but we do have examples of him encouraging its acceptance:
>>>>
>>>>""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of
>>>>their deaths" - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"the nutritionally unnecessary choice deliberately to kill an animal
>>>>ALWAYS causes a moral harm greater in magnitude than . . . the
>>>>moral "benefit" realized by the animal in existing at all" - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude
>>>>than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"The meaningless fact-lette that farm animals "get to
>>>>experience life" deserves no consideration when asking
>>>>whether or not it is moral to kill them. Zero." - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing
>>>>of the animals erases all of it." - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"you MUST believe that it makes moral sense not to raise the
>>>>animals as the only way to prevent the harm that results from
>>>>killing them." - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"Humans could change it. They could change it by ending it." - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"There is no "selfishness" involved in wanting farm animals not to
>>>>exist as a step towards creating a more just world." - Goo
Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


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