Vegetarian Discussion: They Die So We Can Eat Rice...

They Die So We Can Eat Rice...
Posts: 24

Report Abuse

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

Page:  Previous  1 2 3   Next  (First | Last)

AL
2006-09-01 13:58:31 EST
brother wrote:

> Andy wrote:
>
>> Andy comments:
>>
>> Not interested in rice....
>>
>> What have you got that dies so I can eat steak ???
>
>
> Have a guess fat boy.



Well, there goes MY appetite - guess I'll pass on lunch, grab a cold one
and head back to the field.

AL


B*@canada.com
2006-09-01 14:28:33 EST

rick wrote:
> "brother" <see@you.move.com> wrote in message
> news:4lqsbtF37uljU2@individual.net...
> > rick wrote:
> >> "brother" <see@you.move.com> wrote in message
> >> news:4lqr43F38ivgU2@individual.net...
> >>> dh@. wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> http://tinyurl.com/goh3f
> >>> Do you really think there's four amphibians in EVERY square
> >>> foot of rice?
> >>> =======================
> >> There can be. Each spring around our pond it gets so that
> >> you cannot even walk
> >> around the pond. It looks like the grass is moving there are
> >> that many frogs. It's like a bad
> >> horror film where a carpet of frogs are all moving in mass...
> >> Even now I'll see several while i mow.
> >> Some years are really bad, this year had somewhat fewer
> >> numbers than last, but it seemed like they are
> >> here longer.
> >>
> >
> > What rice field are you referring to?
> > =========================
> Nice strawman. It doesn't HAVE to be a rice field, only a body
> of water. But thanks for proving your ignorance and stupidity,
> killer.
>



How about some photographic evidence of the deaths pRicky?

Quit being so fuckin' GAY and go out and get some pictures!!!






>
>
> >
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>


SpaceMonkeyGleep
2006-09-01 19:14:49 EST
In article <1157123480.645686.177140@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Andy" <andysharpe@juno.com> wrote:

> Andy comments:
>
> Not interested in rice....
>
> What have you got that dies so I can eat steak ???
>
> Andy in Eureka, Texas
>

Does the cow count, or are you specifically looking for a side-order of
collateral damage?

Perfectly content member of PETA - People Eating Tasty Animals.
--
GLEEEEEP!
It ain't the bullet with my name on it that I'm afraid of - There's no dodging
that one. It's the one addressed "To whom it may concern" that worries me.

D*@.
2006-09-01 20:19:44 EST
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 15:53:29 +0100, brother <see@you.move.com> wrote:

>rick wrote:
>> "brother" <see@you.move.com> wrote in message
>> news:4lqsbtF37uljU2@individual.net...
>>> rick wrote:
>>>> "brother" <see@you.move.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:4lqr43F38ivgU2@individual.net...
>>>>> dh@. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/goh3f
>>>>> Do you really think there's four amphibians in EVERY square
>>>>> foot of rice?
>>>>> =======================
>>>> There can be. Each spring around our pond it gets so that
>>>> you cannot even walk
>>>> around the pond. It looks like the grass is moving there are
>>>> that many frogs. It's like a bad
>>>> horror film where a carpet of frogs are all moving in mass...
>>>> Even now I'll see several while i mow.
>>>> Some years are really bad, this year had somewhat fewer
>>>> numbers than last, but it seemed like they are
>>>> here longer.
>>>>
>>> What rice field are you referring to?
>>> =========================
>> Nice strawman. It doesn't HAVE to be a rice field, only a body
>> of water.
>
>What

It's the stuff they flood rice fields with, changing the environment
and drowning land animals. Then a new group of creatures establish
populations in the new water filled environment. Later the water
is drained, killing a lot of the water dependant animals. A while later
the harvester comes along killing a lot of the ones who still survive.
After harvest, pretty much anything that has survived is killed off
by predators who have easy pickings because their prey (the
creatures who lived in the rice field) have lost the shelter of the
rice plants.

D*@.
2006-09-01 20:25:47 EST
On 1 Sep 2006 08:11:20 -0700, "Andy" <andysharpe@juno.com> wrote:

>Andy comments:
>
> Not interested in rice....
>
>What have you got that dies so I can eat steak ???

If you're looking for death, you'll find more in the
rice. People get many servings of meat from the
death of a steer. If a grass raised steer provides
1000 servings of meat, that's pretty much 1/1000
death per serving. In contrast to that, there may
be several deaths involved with a bowl or two
of rice. On top of that the cattle only live because
they're raised for food, so eating meat not only
contributes to death for cattle, it also contributes
to their lives.

Dutch
2006-09-02 00:12:53 EST

<*h@.> wrote
> On 1 Sep 2006 08:11:20 -0700, "Andy" <andysharpe@juno.com> wrote:
>
>>Andy comments:
>>
>> Not interested in rice....
>>
>>What have you got that dies so I can eat steak ???
>
> If you're looking for death, you'll find more in the
> rice. People get many servings of meat from the
> death of a steer.

Steers eat hay, which is a crop, meaning lots of cds, see studies on vole
populations by Davis et al, also most eat at least some grain.

> If a grass raised steer provides
> 1000 servings of meat, that's pretty much 1/1000
> death per serving.

That's a lie, see above. Besides, meat-eaters eat many other types of meat
other than beef.

> In contrast to that, there may
> be several deaths involved with a bowl or two
> of rice.

You can't say that with any certainty.

> On top of that the cattle only live because
> they're raised for food, so eating meat not only
> contributes to death for cattle, it also contributes
> to their lives.

The animals killed in crop fields also only live and die because of the rich
crops we grow. If you're going to factor in "contributing to lives" then
commercial crops are better at that than purely grass-fed beef.

You're no better than an ARA if you're just going to lie too. The onus is on
ARAs to establish that we do not have the right to use animals as food,
relax, they can't.



D*@.
2006-09-02 16:09:35 EST
On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 21:12:53 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:

>
><dh@.> wrote
>> On 1 Sep 2006 08:11:20 -0700, "Andy" <andysharpe@juno.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Andy comments:
>>>
>>> Not interested in rice....
>>>
>>>What have you got that dies so I can eat steak ???
>>
>> If you're looking for death, you'll find more in the
>> rice. People get many servings of meat from the
>> death of a steer.
>
>Steers eat hay, which is a crop, meaning lots of cds, see studies on vole
>populations by Davis et al, also most eat at least some grain.
>
>> If a grass raised steer provides
>> 1000 servings of meat, that's pretty much 1/1000
>> death per serving.
>
>That's a lie,

It's a fact, though you "aras" necessarily hate it because it
promotes decent AW for cattle instead of their elimination,
ie: AR.

> see above. Besides, meat-eaters eat many other types of meat
>other than beef.

Andy mentioned steak.

>> In contrast to that, there may
>> be several deaths involved with a bowl or two
>> of rice.
>
>You can't say that with any certainty.

Yes I can. You "aras" just can't understand how there could be.

>> On top of that the cattle only live because
>> they're raised for food, so eating meat not only
>> contributes to death for cattle, it also contributes
>> to their lives.
>
>The animals killed in crop fields also only live and die because of the rich
>crops we grow. If you're going to factor in "contributing to lives" then
>commercial crops are better at that than purely grass-fed beef.

Since I believe plowing, harrowing, planting, treating with *icides
and harvesting all reduce the amount of wildlife that can live in an
area, I can't believe your claim.

>You're no better than an ARA if you're just going to lie too.

So I don't.

Dutch
2006-09-02 18:27:10 EST

<*h@.> wrote in message news:smojf2hk7k56r1qo54l4nab3atan2sessd@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 21:12:53 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>
>>
>><dh@.> wrote
>>> On 1 Sep 2006 08:11:20 -0700, "Andy" <andysharpe@juno.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Andy comments:
>>>>
>>>> Not interested in rice....
>>>>
>>>>What have you got that dies so I can eat steak ???
>>>
>>> If you're looking for death, you'll find more in the
>>> rice. People get many servings of meat from the
>>> death of a steer.
>>
>>Steers eat hay, which is a crop, meaning lots of cds, see studies on vole
>>populations by Davis et al, also most eat at least some grain.
>>
>>> If a grass raised steer provides
>>> 1000 servings of meat, that's pretty much 1/1000
>>> death per serving.
>>
>>That's a lie,
>
> It's a fact,

It's a lie.

> though you "aras" necessarily hate it because it
> promotes decent AW for cattle instead of their elimination,
> ie: AR.

I'm not an ARA, and I hate it because it's a lie.

>> see above. Besides, meat-eaters eat many other types of meat
>>other than beef.
>
> Andy mentioned steak.

How convenient, I am mentioning the rest of the livestock, the other 99% of
the animals, who all eat farmed crops.

>>> In contrast to that, there may
>>> be several deaths involved with a bowl or two
>>> of rice.
>>
>>You can't say that with any certainty.
>
> Yes I can.

No you can't. You're just firing blanks.

> You "aras" just can't understand how there could be.

That's not certainty.

>>> On top of that the cattle only live because
>>> they're raised for food, so eating meat not only
>>> contributes to death for cattle, it also contributes
>>> to their lives.
>>
>>The animals killed in crop fields also only live and die because of the
>>rich
>>crops we grow. If you're going to factor in "contributing to lives" then
>>commercial crops are better at that than purely grass-fed beef.
>
> Since I believe plowing, harrowing, planting, treating with *icides
> and harvesting all reduce the amount of wildlife that can live in an
> area, I can't believe your claim.

Wildlife like voles, frogs and lizards are prolific. You said yourself that
many more are killed in the production of rice, that means *necessarily*
that many must also "get to experience life". You can't have it both ways.
If it's a positive that grass-fed cattle "get to experience life" before we
kill them then it must also be a positive that field mice get to experience
life before we kill them too.

>>You're no better than an ARA if you're just going to lie too.
>
> So I don't.

Yes you do. Your whole approach is a sham.



D*@.
2006-09-04 22:32:52 EST
On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 15:27:10 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:

>
><dh@.> wrote in message news:smojf2hk7k56r1qo54l4nab3atan2sessd@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 21:12:53 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><dh@.> wrote
>>>> On 1 Sep 2006 08:11:20 -0700, "Andy" <andysharpe@juno.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Andy comments:
>>>>>
>>>>> Not interested in rice....
>>>>>
>>>>>What have you got that dies so I can eat steak ???
>>>>
>>>> If you're looking for death, you'll find more in the
>>>> rice. People get many servings of meat from the
>>>> death of a steer.
>>>
>>>Steers eat hay, which is a crop, meaning lots of cds, see studies on vole
>>>populations by Davis et al, also most eat at least some grain.
>>>
>>>> If a grass raised steer provides
>>>> 1000 servings of meat, that's pretty much 1/1000
>>>> death per serving.
>>>
>>>That's a lie,
>>
>> It's a fact,
>
>It's a lie.

How many is it then? Is it more than 3/1000? How many is it
for 1000 servings of rice?

>> though you "aras" necessarily hate it because it
>> promotes decent AW for cattle instead of their elimination,
>> ie: AR.
>
>I'm not an ARA,

"It's wrong to exploit animals by breeding, confining and
killing them." - Dutch

"Rights for animals exist because human rights exist." - Dutch

"My contention is that 'animal rights' have sprouted
like branches from the tree of "HUMAN RIGHTS"." - Dutch

"I am an animal rights believer." - Dutch

>and I hate it because it's a lie.
>
>>> see above. Besides, meat-eaters eat many other types of meat
>>>other than beef.
>>
>> Andy mentioned steak.
>
>How convenient, I am mentioning the rest of the livestock,

Why?

>the other 99% of the animals, who all eat farmed crops.
>
>>>> In contrast to that, there may
>>>> be several deaths involved with a bowl or two
>>>> of rice.
>>>
>>>You can't say that with any certainty.
>>
>> Yes I can.
>
>No you can't. You're just firing blanks.
>
>> You "aras" just can't understand how there could be.
>
>That's not certainty.

It's certain that there may be.

>>>> On top of that the cattle only live because
>>>> they're raised for food, so eating meat not only
>>>> contributes to death for cattle, it also contributes
>>>> to their lives.
>>>
>>>The animals killed in crop fields also only live and die because of the
>>>rich
>>>crops we grow. If you're going to factor in "contributing to lives" then
>>>commercial crops are better at that than purely grass-fed beef.
>>
>> Since I believe plowing, harrowing, planting, treating with *icides
>> and harvesting all reduce the amount of wildlife that can live in an
>> area, I can't believe your claim.
>
>Wildlife like voles, frogs and lizards are prolific. You said yourself that
>many more are killed in the production of rice, that means *necessarily*
>that many must also "get to experience life". You can't have it both ways.
>If it's a positive that grass-fed cattle "get to experience life" before we
>kill them then it must also be a positive that field mice get to experience
>life before we kill them too.

Wildlife get to experience life in pastures too, but in pastures they
aren't killed by plows, harvesters and *icides nearly as often as in rice
fields. Why do you want people to think they are?

>>>You're no better than an ARA if you're just going to lie too.
>>
>> So I don't.
>
>Yes you do. Your whole approach is a sham.

Why do you want people to think that considering lives of positive
value for livestock "is a sham"?

Dutch
2006-09-04 23:28:33 EST

<*h@.> wrote in message news:vcopf25jlf6l8j6c2jnkm6d4uqqu3btqq3@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 15:27:10 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>
>>
>><dh@.> wrote in message news:smojf2hk7k56r1qo54l4nab3atan2sessd@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 21:12:53 -0700, "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>><dh@.> wrote
>>>>> On 1 Sep 2006 08:11:20 -0700, "Andy" <andysharpe@juno.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Andy comments:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not interested in rice....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What have you got that dies so I can eat steak ???
>>>>>
>>>>> If you're looking for death, you'll find more in the
>>>>> rice. People get many servings of meat from the
>>>>> death of a steer.
>>>>
>>>>Steers eat hay, which is a crop, meaning lots of cds, see studies on
>>>>vole
>>>>populations by Davis et al, also most eat at least some grain.
>>>>
>>>>> If a grass raised steer provides
>>>>> 1000 servings of meat, that's pretty much 1/1000
>>>>> death per serving.
>>>>
>>>>That's a lie,
>>>
>>> It's a fact,
>>
>>It's a lie.
>
> How many is it then? Is it more than 3/1000? How many is it
> for 1000 servings of rice?

I don't know and I'm not claiming to know.

>>> though you "aras" necessarily hate it because it
>>> promotes decent AW for cattle instead of their elimination,
>>> ie: AR.
>>
>>I'm not an ARA,
>
> "It's wrong to exploit animals by breeding, confining and
> killing them." - Dutch
>
> "Rights for animals exist because human rights exist." - Dutch
>
> "My contention is that 'animal rights' have sprouted
> like branches from the tree of "HUMAN RIGHTS"." - Dutch
>
> "I am an animal rights believer." - Dutch

Doesn't it strike you as unethical to present quotes as contemporaneous from
a time several years ago when you know I presented myself as an animal
rights advocate? Not to mention desperate? You're sounding more like Derek
all the time.

>>and I hate it because it's a lie.
>>
>>>> see above. Besides, meat-eaters eat many other types of meat
>>>>other than beef.
>>>
>>> Andy mentioned steak.
>>
>>How convenient, I am mentioning the rest of the livestock,
>
> Why?

Because I like demonstrating what a shallow liar you are.

>>the other 99% of the animals, who all eat farmed crops.
>>
>>>>> In contrast to that, there may
>>>>> be several deaths involved with a bowl or two
>>>>> of rice.
>>>>
>>>>You can't say that with any certainty.
>>>
>>> Yes I can.
>>
>>No you can't. You're just firing blanks.
>>
>>> You "aras" just can't understand how there could be.

I can see how there could be.

>>That's not certainty.
>
> It's certain that there may be.

LOL!

>>>>> On top of that the cattle only live because
>>>>> they're raised for food, so eating meat not only
>>>>> contributes to death for cattle, it also contributes
>>>>> to their lives.
>>>>
>>>>The animals killed in crop fields also only live and die because of the
>>>>rich
>>>>crops we grow. If you're going to factor in "contributing to lives" then
>>>>commercial crops are better at that than purely grass-fed beef.
>>>
>>> Since I believe plowing, harrowing, planting, treating with *icides
>>> and harvesting all reduce the amount of wildlife that can live in an
>>> area, I can't believe your claim.
>>
>>Wildlife like voles, frogs and lizards are prolific. You said yourself
>>that
>>many more are killed in the production of rice, that means *necessarily*
>>that many must also "get to experience life". You can't have it both ways.
>>If it's a positive that grass-fed cattle "get to experience life" before
>>we
>>kill them then it must also be a positive that field mice get to
>>experience
>>life before we kill them too.
>
> Wildlife get to experience life in pastures too, but in pastures they
> aren't killed by plows, harvesters and *icides nearly as often as in rice
> fields. Why do you want people to think they are?

I don't, I want you to see the absurdity of your livestock "getting to
experience life" argument.

>>>>You're no better than an ARA if you're just going to lie too.
>>>
>>> So I don't.
>>
>>Yes you do. Your whole approach is a sham.
>
> Why do you want people to think that considering lives of positive
> value for livestock "is a sham"?

People who have heard the LoL already think it's a sham, and have dismissed
it, and you. I am just trying to get the fact through YOUR head.


Page:  Previous  1 2 3   Next  (First | Last)


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