Vegetarian Discussion: Has Fuckwit David Harrison Finally Thrown In The Towel For Good?

Has Fuckwit David Harrison Finally Thrown In The Towel For Good?
Posts: 7

Report Abuse

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

Page: 1   (First | Last)

Rudy Canoza
2014-08-19 13:19:18 EST
He should have done it no later than August 2000. That's when I finally
got him to admit:

Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
born if nothing prevents that from happening,
that would experience the loss if their lives
are prevented.
Fuckwit - 08/01/2000

He actually was defeated well before that, but that admission was what
drove the final nail all but 1/10th of 1mm into his coffin.

M*@.not.
2014-08-22 15:34:40 EST
On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:19:18 -0700, Goo wrote:
.
>He should have done it no later than August 2000. That's when I finally
>got him to admit:

Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be born if
nothing prevents that from happening, that would
experience the loss if their lives are prevented.
I don't believe that the individual animals exist
in any way before they are conceived, but I am
also aware that billions more animals *will* exist
as a result of the farming industry if nothing
(like ARAs) prevents it from happening. To me that
is a major aspect to take into consideration.

James G. Keegan Jr.
2014-08-22 17:06:30 EST
On 8/22/2014 12:34 PM, mur@.not. wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:19:18 -0700, james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> .
>> He should have done it no later than August 2000. That's when I finally
>> got him to admit:
>>
>> Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
>> born if nothing prevents that from happening,
>> that would experience the loss if their lives
>> are prevented.
>> Fuckwit - 08/01/2000
>>
>> He actually was defeated well before that, but that admission was what
>> drove the final nail all but 1/10th of 1mm into his coffin.

No comment, I see.



Rudy Canoza
2014-08-22 17:06:34 EST
On 8/19/2014 10:19 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
> He should have done it no later than August 2000. That's when I finally
> got him to admit:
>
> Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
> born if nothing prevents that from happening,
> that would experience the loss if their lives
> are prevented.
> Fuckwit - 08/01/2000
>
> He actually was defeated well before that, but that admission was what
> drove the final nail all but 1/10th of 1mm into his coffin.


M*@.not.
2014-09-10 15:13:07 EST
On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 14:06:34 -0700, Goo wrote:
.
>On 8/19/2014 10:19 AM, Goo wrote:
>> He should have done it no later than August 2000. That's when I finally
>> got him to admit:

Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be born if
nothing prevents that from happening, that would
experience the loss if their lives are prevented.
I don't believe that the individual animals exist
in any way before they are conceived, but I am
also aware that billions more animals *will* exist
as a result of the farming industry if nothing
(like ARAs) prevents it from happening. To me that
is a major aspect to take into consideration.

M*@.not.
2014-09-10 15:13:14 EST
On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 14:06:30 -0700, Goo wrote:
.
>On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 15:34:40 -0400, mur@.not. wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:19:18 -0700, Goo wrote:
>>.
>>>He should have done it no later than August 2000. That's when I finally
>>>got him to admit:
>>
>>Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be born if
>>nothing prevents that from happening, that would
>>experience the loss if their lives are prevented.
>>I don't believe that the individual animals exist
>>in any way before they are conceived, but I am
>>also aware that billions more animals *will* exist
>>as a result of the farming industry if nothing
>>(like ARAs) prevents it from happening. To me that
>>is a major aspect to take into consideration.
>
>No comment

Good, Goo.

J*@gmaƮl.com?
2014-09-10 15:48:41 EST
On 9/10/2014 12:13 PM, mur@.not. wrote:
> On 8/22/2014 2:06 PM, james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>> On 8/22/2014 12:34 PM, mur@.not. wrote:
>>> On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:19:18 -0700, james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>> .
>>>> He should have done it no later than August 2000. That's when I finally
>>>> got him to admit:
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
>>>> born if nothing prevents that from happening,
>>>> that would experience the loss if their lives
>>>> are prevented.
>>>> Fuckwit - 08/01/2000
>>>>
>>>> He actually was defeated well before that, but that admission was what
>>>> drove the final nail all but 1/10th of 1mm into his coffin.
>>
>> No comment, I see.
>
> Good,

I don't know about that, but it's very telling.

You were beaten 15 years ago, Goo.

Page: 1   (First | Last)


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