Vegetarian Discussion: Why This Board Is So Frustrating

Why This Board Is So Frustrating
Posts: 57

Report Abuse

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

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6   Next  (First | Last)

Larrylook
2006-02-22 20:16:18 EST
This board is very frustrating and I'll tell you exactly why. Vegetarians
and Vegans have found a way to eat that causes less deaths of valuable
animals than typical meat eaters. It's been well proven. Those cows eat
tons of grain and soy and the collateral deaths keep piling up.
Unpleasant interlopers have taken over and they think they are so
smart because they've come up with a theoretical impractical unrealistic
nonpracticed diet that includes eating large ruminators that may (unproven)
on the whole kill less, because of all those moles and voles that die when
you grow carrots.
Well noone is really interested in this theoretical diet. Ok? Vegans
don't want to eat cows. They find it repugnant. Would you eat your dead
grandma if it would cause less deaths overall? It's not healthy to eat
cows. There's a lot of coronary artery disease around, haven't you noticed?
So leave them alone since it's clear they are doing good. The fact that you
have discovered that simply living a modern life makes you responsible for
some deaths is getting old and doesn't prove your point and I'm not killing
anything by posting this Rick - you haven't convinced me.



Rick
2006-02-22 20:24:08 EST

"larrylook" <noemail@email.com> wrote in message
news:VoSdnVerTJ1DkWDenZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com...
> This board is very frustrating and I'll tell you exactly why.
> Vegetarians and Vegans have found a way to eat that causes less
> deaths of valuable animals than typical meat eaters. It's been
> well proven.
=================================
Then it should be able to show that proof, eh killer? Why
haven't you posted it before?



Those cows eat
> tons of grain and soy and the collateral deaths keep piling up.
=============================
No, fool, they all do not. ALL beef cattle spend most of their
lives on pasture and range, eating NO grains or soy.
That you continue yours lys and delusions are the only things you
have proven here, fool.



> Unpleasant interlopers have taken over and they think they
> are so smart because they've come up with a theoretical
> impractical unrealistic nonpracticed diet that includes eating
> large ruminators that may (unproven) on the whole kill less,
> because of all those moles and voles that die when you grow
> carrots.
========================
ROTFLMAO We come up with fantasy diets? What a hoot larryboy.
Your're the king of non-reality what-ifs?



> Well noone is really interested in this theoretical diet.
> Ok? Vegans don't want to eat cows. They find it repugnant.
> Would you eat your dead grandma if it would cause less deaths
> overall? It's not healthy to eat cows.
==========================
It's perfectly healyth to eat cows, fool. What not healthy is an
only plant diet. That's what is proven...
You're lack of mental ability being exhibit #1, killer.


There's a lot of coronary artery disease around, haven't you
noticed?
> So leave them alone since it's clear they are doing good. The
> fact that you have discovered that simply living a modern life
> makes you responsible for some deaths is getting old and
> doesn't prove your point and I'm not killing anything by
> posting this Rick - you haven't convinced me.
=======================
Of course not, you refuse to open you eyes and read for
comprehension fool. Makes your fantasy delusions so much easier
to accept, eh killer?


>
>



Leif Erikson
2006-02-22 21:03:16 EST
larrylook wrote:

> This board is very frustrating and I'll tell you exactly why.

The reason why, larry fuckwit, is because of goddamned
fucking shitheads like you who won't even attempt to
answer a basic question. You assert that *morally*, a
cow is "worth" more than a mouse. We want to know WHY
you think that, you cocksucker. We don't want you to
blabber about art (that you've never seen) or music
(that you've never heard). We want you to answer the
FUCKING question that you were asked,
shit-for-braincell. Now ANSWER it: WHY do you morally
value the cow higher than the mouse?

Prediction: you'll take a shit, again, and evade the
question.

John Wesley
2006-02-22 21:36:33 EST
In article <VoSdnVerTJ1DkWDenZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
n*l@email.com says...
> Vegans
> don't want to eat cows.

Well whats wrong with 'em?

> They find it repugnant.

I find people who look white as ghost, wear birkenstocks, don't bathe,
don't use deodorant, and women who don't shave their legs and arm pits
repugnant.

>
> Would you eat your dead
> grandma if it would cause less deaths overall?

So your grandma was a cow. Sorry to hear that. Maybe she should have
got off her fat ass and exercised.

> It's not healthy to eat
> cows.

My grandma eats cow and she is 90 years old, still drives, and still
rides her bike. So shes not healthy. Is that what you are saying?

> There's a lot of coronary artery disease around, haven't you noticed?

Thats from sitting on your ass and not exercising. Nothing to do with
eating cows. You can eat peanut butter and green beans all day and sit
on your ass all day and die of coronary artery disease.


John Wesley
2006-02-22 21:39:04 EST
In article <EJ8Lf.10$6I.4@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
j*l@phs.con says...
> larrylook wrote:
>
> > This board is very frustrating and I'll tell you exactly why.
>
> You assert that *morally*, a
> cow is "worth" more than a mouse. We want to know WHY
> you think that, you cocksucker.

If he does that doesn't that make him a meat eater? Hes a closet meat
eater!

Larrylook
2006-02-22 22:18:57 EST
This board is very frustrating and I'll tell you exactly why.
>
> The reason why, larry fuckwit, is because of goddamned fucking shitheads
> like you who won't even attempt to answer a basic question. You assert
> that *morally*, a cow is "worth" more than a mouse. We want to know WHY
> you think that, you cocksucker. We don't want you to blabber about art
> (that you've never seen) or music (that you've never heard). We want you
> to answer the FUCKING question that you were asked, shit-for-braincell.
> Now ANSWER it: WHY do you morally value the cow higher than the mouse?

Boy, all you guys on the attack mode, and such insults. It's because you
are all trying so hard to defend the ridiculous opinion that all lives are
worth the same. So absurd and you all don't get it. You embarrass
yourselves. I'm telling you, even if there were 10 of you calling me
impolite names no one would believe your point.

Also Rick doesn't get it that most beef are fed more than grass. He wants
to ignore it. See:
http://www.deliciousorganics.com/Controversies/grassfed.htm
http://www.mercola.com/2002/apr/17/cattle1.htm
http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9809/11/ecoli.cattle/index.html
He's got this imaginary grass fed cow in his mind. But people in New York
City aren't eating his cow. He lives in a dream world. He wants to compare
the vegetarians diet to this theoretical fantasy diet of his. You guys need
to research this a bit before you put your foot in your mouths. If you're
not careful some gullible vegetarian will start eating at McDonald's and not
realize how many more animals he's killing due to all these collateral
deaths. I'd stop now.





Slippery Slope
2006-02-22 22:26:29 EST
larrylook wrote:

> This board is very frustrating and I'll tell you exactly why.

No, you won't tell us, larry, you fuckwit, because
*you* are the reason it's so frustrating, and I know
you're not going to admit being the cause.

>
>>The reason why, larry fuckwit, is because of goddamned fucking shitheads
>>like you who won't even attempt to answer a basic question. You assert
>>that *morally*, a cow is "worth" more than a mouse. We want to know WHY
>>you think that, you cocksucker. We don't want you to blabber about art
>>(that you've never seen) or music (that you've never heard). We want you
>>to answer the FUCKING question that you were asked, shit-for-braincell.
>>Now ANSWER it: WHY do you morally value the cow higher than the mouse?
>
>
> Boy, all you guys on the attack mode, and such insults.

You have a sign on you that says "attack me", larry.
I'm glad to oblige.


> It's because you
> are all trying so hard to defend the ridiculous opinion that all lives are
> worth the same.

NO, you lying fuckwit. I knew you'd get it wrong.

No one attacking your fuckwittery has ventured the
opinion that all lives are the same value, you
goddamned fucking cocksucking LIAR. HERE is how things
are:

a) YOU hold the belief that not all lives are equal,
but you are UNABLE to tell us why you value any
two different animals differently. For example,
you lying shitbag, I have not said that *I* value
a cow's life and mouse's life equally; what I have
done is ask YOU, you evasive stupid incoherent sack
of shit, why YOU value them differently.

WHY DO you value them differently, stupid incoherent
fuckwitted liar larry?

b) True "animal rights activists" believe that all
sentient or "subject-of-a-life" animals *are* of
equal value, you goddamned ignorant sack-of-shit
buffoon; so how can you possibly consider yourself
a so-called "ethical" vegetarian? You aren't one.


The reason this group is so frustrating, you lying
shitbag, is because of ignorant, incomprehensible fucks
like you who can't explain your beliefs.

Rick
2006-02-22 23:12:02 EST

"larrylook" <noemail@email.com> wrote in message
news:XuednczN665VtGDeRVn-iQ@comcast.com...
> This board is very frustrating and I'll tell you exactly why.
>>
>> The reason why, larry fuckwit, is because of goddamned fucking
>> shitheads like you who won't even attempt to answer a basic
>> question. You assert that *morally*, a cow is "worth" more
>> than a mouse. We want to know WHY you think that, you
>> cocksucker. We don't want you to blabber about art (that
>> you've never seen) or music (that you've never heard). We
>> want you to answer the FUCKING question that you were asked,
>> shit-for-braincell. Now ANSWER it: WHY do you morally value
>> the cow higher than the mouse?
>
> Boy, all you guys on the attack mode, and such insults. It's
> because you are all trying so hard to defend the ridiculous
> opinion that all lives are worth the same. So absurd and you
> all don't get it. You embarrass yourselves. I'm telling you,
> even if there were 10 of you calling me impolite names no one
> would believe your point.
>
> Also Rick doesn't get it that most beef are fed more than
> grass. He wants to ignore it.
===============================
No, Larryboy, I don't ignore anything. You, on the other hand
igmore reality. Again, ALL beef cattle are pasture and range
raised. Then, 3/4 of those are sent to feedlots for the last
weeks before slaughter. Too bad for you the sites you posted say
the same thing, eh killer?



See:
> http://www.deliciousorganics.com/Controversies/grassfed.htm
Pasture-raised animals have a much better life. They aren't
shipped off. They remain on the pasture their entire lives.
They have room to roam. They have fresh air. They eat a natural
diet, what they were intended on eating. They are healthy.
Since they are eating right they are strong and healthy;
therefore they have no need for antibiotics and hormones like
conventional cows. They grow naturally. Therefore, the products
from these cows are truly wholesome and natural.


> http://www.mercola.com/2002/apr/17/cattle1.htm
Born last March 13 in a birthing shed across the road, No. 534
was turned out on pasture with his mother as soon as the 80-pound
calf stood up and began nursing. After a few weeks, the calf
began supplementing his mother's milk by nibbling on a salad bar
of mostly native grasses: western wheatgrass, little bluestem,
green needlegrass.



> http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9809/11/ecoli.cattle/index.html
> He's got this imaginary grass fed cow in his mind. But people
> in New York City aren't eating his cow.
=================================
Yes, they are fool. Too bad you really are this ignorant.
http://www.eatwild.com/products/newyork.html
http://www.newyorkbeef.com/where_to_find.asp
http://www.sustainabletable.org/blog/archives/2005/06/grass_fed_beef.html




He lives in a dream world.
============================
Only in your dreams and delusions, fool.


He wants to compare
> the vegetarians diet to this theoretical fantasy diet of his.
=============================
ROTFLMAO What a fool! Where do this new yorkers get your
fantasy veggies, idiot?


You guys need
> to research this a bit before you put your foot in your mouths.
> If you're not careful some gullible vegetarian will start
> eating at McDonald's and not realize how many more animals he's
> killing due to all these collateral deaths. I'd stop now.
===========================
If I were you, yes, I would. All you've mananged to do is make
yourself look the ignorant fool that you are, killer...


>
>
>
>



Dutch
2006-02-22 23:21:45 EST

"larrylook" <noemail@email.com> wrote
> This board is very frustrating and I'll tell you exactly why. Vegetarians
> and Vegans have found a way to eat that causes less deaths of valuable
> animals than typical meat eaters. It's been well proven. Those cows eat
> tons of grain and soy and the collateral deaths keep piling up.

That's not it at all. The point you are missing is that meat-eaters do not
agree that killing the fewest number of animals is important. Vegans need to
pursue their little quasi-religious notion and shut up about it, nobody
cares.

> Unpleasant interlopers have taken over and they think they are so
> smart because they've come up with a theoretical impractical unrealistic
> nonpracticed diet that includes eating large ruminators that may
> (unproven) on the whole kill less, because of all those moles and voles
> that die when you grow carrots.

The Davis theory is very plausible, I have changed to mostly free-range and
pastured organic products and I am confident that my death toll is quite
comparable to the average vegan's.

> Well noone is really interested in this theoretical diet. Ok?

It's less theoretical than the so-called "ideal vegan diet" which supposedly
causes NO deaths. The only people who are opposed to the concept are vegans
and people like you who are hooked on the idea that veganism MUST be the
greatest thing since sliced bread.

> Vegans don't want to eat cows. They find it repugnant.

I find parsnips repugnant, so WHAT?

> Would you eat your dead grandma if it would cause less deaths overall?

You're a fucking idiot, still.

> It's not healthy to eat cows. There's a lot of coronary artery disease
> around, haven't you noticed?

Ipse dixit.

> So leave them alone since it's clear they are doing good.

Leave who alone? Nobody is forcing vegans to subscribe to this newsgroup to
preach their crap. Vegans need to leave meat eaters alone and quit with all
the hateful lies and rhetoric.

This board is frustrating for you because you're a stubborn fool who can't
think his way out of a wet paper bag.

[..]



Dutch
2006-02-22 23:22:42 EST

"larrylook" <noemail@email.com> wrote
> This board is very frustrating and I'll tell you exactly why.
>>
>> The reason why, larry fuckwit, is because of goddamned fucking shitheads
>> like you who won't even attempt to answer a basic question. You assert
>> that *morally*, a cow is "worth" more than a mouse. We want to know WHY
>> you think that, you cocksucker. We don't want you to blabber about art
>> (that you've never seen) or music (that you've never heard). We want you
>> to answer the FUCKING question that you were asked, shit-for-braincell.
>> Now ANSWER it: WHY do you morally value the cow higher than the mouse?
>
> Boy

Just answer the question


Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6   Next  (First | Last)


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