Re: How Sarah Palin Created a Whole New Generation of Vegetarians

Rupert wrote:
> On Dec 2, 7:01 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Dutch wrote:
>>
>>> "Rupert" <rupertmccal...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>
news:ee03bd9c-775d-40de-9430-2b0be5ae3cf6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> On Dec 1, 5:09 pm, "Dutch" <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> "Rupert" <rupertmccal...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>>>> On Nov 30, 12:03 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>> On Nov 29, 6:13 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>>>>>>> pearl wrote:
>>>>>>>> 'Turkeys for Thanksgiving
>>>>>>> Yes, and it was delicious - the best one I've ever prepared.
>>>>>> You have been known to make the remark that there are some
>>>> enforceable
>>>>>> constraints on how we may treat nonhuman animals.
>>>>> None of them precludes killing animals to eat them.
>>>> Not a serious response.
>>>> It is a serious response, animal rights sup****ters consistently point
to
>>>> abuse of animals in the meat industry and then leap to the conclusion
>>>> that
>>>> the meat industry ought to be abolished. It's like aboli****ng schools
>>>> because some children suffer bullying by other students or teachers.
>>> No, it is not. The claim that the meat industry ought to be abolished
>>> is not what was under discussion. Ball was changing the topic and
>>> evading the question that was put to him.
>> Something wrong with your news client.  The paragraph immediately above
>> is rupie's, the on immediately below is yours, but they are indented
the
>> same.
>>
>>> Nonetheless, it is a serious comment that deserves a serious response.
>>> The whole underlying message of AR is that meat farming should be
>>> abolished because abuses exist.
>> That actually isn't the fundamental message of "ar", which is exactly
>> why the doctored videos showing "abuses" are so pointlessly
>> inflammatory.  "ar" holds as its central tenet the belief that *all*
>> human use of animals is immoral, whether or not the animals are killed,
>> and whether or not those that are killed are killed humanely.  So, to
>> committed "ar" loons, the existence of Bossy the milk cow, who gets to
>> go out freely into a pasture every day and is lovingly put back her
barn
>> at night - basically, a pretty nice existence - is viewed as being just
>> as immoral as the existence of the most wretched crated veal calf or
>> battery hen.  As I spent (too) much time demonstrating to that stupid
>> cow Skanky, there are no degrees of immorality or wrongness;
> 
> That's got to be one of the all-time classic quotes.

It's a true statement.  Something either is morally wrong, or it isn't 
morally wrong.  There are no "degrees" of wrongness.

There really are two questions, you stupid *****.  First, is something 
wrong?  This is a yes or no question.  If you answer "yes", then there 
is a secondary question:  how bad is it?

But there are no "degrees" of wrongness.  Something is wrong, or it isn't.


>> something
>> either is morally wrong, or it isn't.

If you weren't such a hysterical *****, you'd have read further and seen 
that.