great group
in [Vegetarian]
|
Prev: Pro Hunt Violence - 'Hunt' assault suspects caught on camera
Next: What are the ethics regarding Cow Milk?
From: Ocean http://www.OceanMusic.com on 16 Sep 2006 16:47 this is awesome that others are vegan for ethical reasons and because they love animals. the world seems a little less lonely from a soulful point of view since you others are here. i'll have some contributions soon also. wishing you all the best!
From: rick on 16 Sep 2006 20:46 "Ocean http://www.OceanMusic.com" <ultocean(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1158439661.395026.19450(a)i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > this is awesome that others are vegan for ethical reasons ==================== Are you really this stupid about veganism? It is NOT a diet, it IS supposedly about ethics and a way of life. There are however no REAL vegans here on usenet. It violates all the supposed ethics and caring about animals it claims to follow... You'll gladly contribute to the brutal, inhumane deaths of billions and billions of animals by posting here, yet will probably rant and rave about a few thousnd bulls or the like. Why is that? Why is the 'caring' only about animals that YOU are not killing? and because > they love animals. > the world seems a little less lonely from a soulful point of > view since > you others are here. > i'll have some contributions soon also. =================== Probably the typical emotive, delusional, non-reality based foolishness we've all come to expect and love... > wishing you all the best! >
From: Rupert on 17 Sep 2006 10:52 rick wrote: > "Ocean http://www.OceanMusic.com" <ultocean(a)hotmail.com> wrote in > message > news:1158439661.395026.19450(a)i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > this is awesome that others are vegan for ethical reasons > ==================== > Are you really this stupid about veganism? It is NOT a diet, it > IS supposedly about ethics and a way of life. > There are however no REAL vegans here on usenet. It violates all > the supposed ethics and caring about animals it claims to > follow... > You'll gladly contribute to the brutal, inhumane deaths of > billions and billions of animals by posting here, yet will > probably rant and rave about a few thousnd bulls or the like. > Why is that? Why is the 'caring' only about animals that YOU are > not killing? > Can we have a bit of sanity here? This "billions and billions of animals" is totally meaningless. You can always pick a set of animal deaths, as large as you please, and say, he contributes to this set. That doesn't mean the size of the number somehow reflects badly on him. What's of interest is the expected increase in the number of animal deaths as a result of his one post. If you want to come up with a sensible estimate for that, go ahead. Billions and billions is not a sensible estimate. If you're going to cite "billions and billions" for his posting to Usenet, then we with equal justice can cite "billions and billions" for the meat industry. This "billions and billions" as opposed to "a few thousand" is just ridiculous ranting with absolutely no basis in reality. If you're going to draw a comparison, make it a sensible one with some foundation in reality. Do you mind spelling out for us exactly how communications infrastructure causes the death of billions of animals? You cited a large death toll for three power plants, but are those types of cooling system in widespread use? And were the power plants nuclear or coal-powered? How do the death tolls for the two systems of power production compare? (We don't have any nuclear power in Australia). > > > and because > > they love animals. > > the world seems a little less lonely from a soulful point of > > view since > > you others are here. > > i'll have some contributions soon also. > =================== > Probably the typical emotive, delusional, non-reality based > foolishness we've all come to expect and love... > > > > wishing you all the best! > >
From: rick on 17 Sep 2006 13:46 "Rupert" <rupertmccallum(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1158504758.879184.199770(a)i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > rick wrote: >> "Ocean http://www.OceanMusic.com" <ultocean(a)hotmail.com> wrote >> in >> message >> news:1158439661.395026.19450(a)i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> > this is awesome that others are vegan for ethical reasons >> ==================== >> Are you really this stupid about veganism? It is NOT a diet, >> it >> IS supposedly about ethics and a way of life. >> There are however no REAL vegans here on usenet. It violates >> all >> the supposed ethics and caring about animals it claims to >> follow... >> You'll gladly contribute to the brutal, inhumane deaths of >> billions and billions of animals by posting here, yet will >> probably rant and rave about a few thousnd bulls or the like. >> Why is that? Why is the 'caring' only about animals that YOU >> are >> not killing? >> > > Can we have a bit of sanity here? This "billions and billions > of > animals" is totally meaningless. ================================ ROTFLMAO That's the point fool, veganism on usenet is totally meaningless. Thanks for agreeing... You can always pick a set of animal > deaths, as large as you please, and say, he contributes to this > set. > That doesn't mean the size of the number somehow reflects badly > on him. ========================== Yes, it does when you claim that 'saving' animals is what you are about and openly applaude others for the same statements with no basis in reality... > What's of interest is the expected increase in the number of > animal > deaths as a result of his one post. If you want to come up with > a > sensible estimate for that, go ahead. Billions and billions is > not a > sensible estimate. If you're going to cite "billions and > billions" for > his posting to Usenet, then we with equal justice can cite > "billions > and billions" for the meat industry. ============================= Again, no one that eats meat is claiming otherwise, fool. Do try to keep up. vegans get all beant out of shape about a few 1000 seals, or even fewer bulls, and never once blink an eye at their OWN bloody footprints. Too bad you are too stupid and brainwashed to understand that, killer. This "billions and billions" as > opposed to "a few thousand" is just ridiculous ranting with > absolutely > no basis in reality. If you're going to draw a comparison, make > it a > sensible one with some foundation in reality. ======================== It's completely based on reality fool. Power generation kills billions and billions of animals every year. The net is estimated to use 5 to 15% of that power. 10% of billions and billions is not a trivial number no matter how much hand waving you might wish to do, hypocrite... > > Do you mind spelling out for us exactly how communications > infrastructure causes the death of billions of animals? You > cited a > large death toll for three power plants, but are those types of > cooling > system in widespread use? And were the power plants nuclear or > coal-powered? How do the death tolls for the two systems of > power > production compare? (We don't have any nuclear power in > Australia). ================================== Coal fired plants produce energy the same way, steam. Hot water is part of steam for you learning impaired loons... More are killed from towers, and power lines. Coomunications towers are also a problem. Too bad you cannot escape the fact that your entertainment is contributing to the death and suffering of many animals, killer. The continued dependence on coal by Australia makes it one of the world leaders in co2 emmisions, hypocrite... Plus, it's mining is habitat destruction, eh fool? > >> >> >> and because >> > they love animals. >> > the world seems a little less lonely from a soulful point of >> > view since >> > you others are here. >> > i'll have some contributions soon also. >> =================== >> Probably the typical emotive, delusional, non-reality based >> foolishness we've all come to expect and love... >> >> >> > wishing you all the best! >> > >
From: dh on 17 Sep 2006 14:45
On 16 Sep 2006 13:47:41 -0700, "Ocean http://www.OceanMusic.com" <ultocean(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >this is awesome Thanks ??) >that others are vegan for ethical reasons and because >they love animals. ? Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does. What they try to avoid are products which provide life (and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have to avoid the following items containing animal by-products in order to be successful: Tires, Paper, Upholstery, Floor waxes, Glass, Water Filters, Rubber, Fertilizer, Antifreeze, Ceramics, Insecticides, Insulation, Linoleum, Plastic, Textiles, Blood factors, Collagen, Heparin, Insulin, Solvents, Biodegradable Detergents, Herbicides, Gelatin Capsules, Adhesive Tape, Laminated Wood Products, Plywood, Paneling, Wallpaper and Wallpaper Paste, Cellophane Wrap and Tape, Abrasives, Steel Ball Bearings The meat industry provides life for the animals that it slaughters, and the animals live and die as a result of it as animals do in other habitats. They also depend on it for their lives as animals do in other habitats. If people consume animal products from animals they think are raised in decent ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the future. People who want to contribute to decent lives for livestock with their lifestyle must do it by being conscientious consumers of animal products, because they can not do it by being vegan. From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings derived from grass raised animals. Grass raised animal products contribute to fewer wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and better lives for livestock than soy or rice products. ? >the world seems a little less lonely from a soulful point of view since >you others are here. We're glad you like it. >i'll have some contributions soon also. Cool. >wishing you all the best! You too! |