Rupert wrote:
> On Jul 23, 5:08 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> ****wit is only interested in animals for himself. He
>> likes "meat...gravy." "aras" confront him with a truth
>> that ****wit cannot address: that ****wit's
>> consumption of "meat...gravy" harms animals interests.
>> ****wit *wants* to take the "aras'" case apart, but
>> he can't. Instead, he tries to beat them at their own
>> game, by imagining a *new* right or interest held
>> by...non-existent animals. It falls completely flat,
>> because a) it's patently absurd; b) it has already
>> been demolished, over a century ago; and c) ****wit is
>> too sophomorically inept to have any hope of making it
>> work.
>>
>> The entire thing, nine years of wasted time, was just
>> ****wit trying to justify HIS pursuit of HIS interest.
>> ****wit does not care and never cared about animals'
>> well-being. He just wants "meat...gravy."
>
> You can't make any credible case against animal rights either.
I can and have.
|
