Re: Time to Start Shooting "animal rights" Psychopaths

Goo - ****wit David Harrison, fat pig-****er and moronic cracker - lied 
and presented no challenge:
> On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 09:35:04 -0700 (PDT), Rupert
<rupertmccallum@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
>> Goo - ****wit David Harrison, fat pig-****er and moronic cracker - lied
and presented no challenge:
>>> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 01:58:34 -0700 (PDT), Dragonblaze
<dragonbl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> On 1 Jul, 18:54, Rupert <rupertmccal...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>> These quotations from David Harrison are certainly very interesting.
>>>>> Engaging in an activity which is like to cause injury or death to
>>>>> humans, or for that matter any sentient being, is not an ethically
>>>>> justifiable way to behave and it's a very poor strategy for doing
>>>>> something about animal suffering, which one would hope is the
ultimate
>>>>> goal. I will not donate money to PETA because I do not wish my money
>>>>> to end up in the hands of the Earth Liberation Front and many of us
in
>>>>> the animal protection movement frequently have cause to feel annoyed
>>>>> with PETA as one of the more publicly visible organisations in the
>>>>> animal protection movement who identify themselves as "animal
rights".
>>>>> Your typical animal rights activist doesn't really fit the image you
>>>>> would normally have of a terrorist.
>>>> PETA's track record in animal welfare is abysmal - since they think
>>>> pets should not exist due to their belief in "animal rights" - and
>>>> there was a scandal with PETA killing than 90 percent of the
adoptable
>>>> animals in its care during 2007. Which means the sadistic PETA freaks
>>>> will not get a single penny off me -
EVER!http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
>>>> Now, I'm an omnivore, and very interested in animal welfare
>>>> (something quite a few vegans deny is possible).
>>>     It's people like yourself who contribute to better lives for
livestock
>>> with your lifestyle. Vegans do NOT. It's people like yourself who care
>>> about those animals' lives, NOT vegans. They have no argument
>>> against your interest in AW. Their elimination objective works against
>>> providing decent lives.
>>>
>> Most animals in modern farms do not have decent lives, and this is a
>> consequence of the mindset which says that it is okay for us to use
>> animals for our own ends. 
> 
>     It's because the lack of caring is so universal that some animals 
> are living in conditions which condemn them to a life of negative 
> value.

Naturally you're missing rupie's point, Goo, you stupid lying 
pig-****er.  His point - I disagree with it, but unlike you, I get it - 
is that if you feel it's morally acceptable to use animals for our own 
ends, then there is no reason to to care about their welfare.

You can't address his point, Goo - stupid pig-****er - because it's 
beyond your ability.

> 
>> Veganism is a perfectly reasonable strategy
>> for reducing suffering, and there is no basis for saying that vegans
>> don't "care" as much as conscientious omnivores, 
> 
>     Yes there is,

Not that you can show, Goo.


>> that is idiotic.
> 
>     I feel confident that you know much better than that.

Your confidence is that of a moron.


> 
>> There is no reason why providing "decent" lives for livestock is
>> better than allowing wild animals to fill up the ecological niche.
> 
>     It seems we've been here before. When you think it all the 
> way through:
> Whatever reason we grow crops, wildlife including insects are not 
> welcome in the crop fields, so they're poisoned etc. The idea is
> that no animals live there, not that wildlife live there.

You stupid, STUPID pig-****ing cracker, Goo.  What he's saying, Goo - 
Goo - is much cropland wouldn't be cropland if it weren't growing crops 
to feed to animals.  It most likely would revert to whatever natural 
state it was in before being made into cropland, Goo.  It certainly 
wouldn't become housing or industrial property, Goo, or else it already 
would have done so.

You don't know what you're talking about, Goo.