animals

"Kris" <ducky8882003.DeleteThis@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:ad856af6.0310301956.27650d2@posting.google.com...
> animals r just animals

Yep, aren't we all
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

"andy-k" <spam.drain RemoveThis @ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:hOnob.2333$mV1.917918@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
> "Kris" <ducky8882003 RemoveThis @yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:ad856af6.0310301956.27650d2@posting.google.com...
> > animals r just animals
>
> Define "animal"
>

lower life form
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

On 30 Oct 2003 19:56:07 -0800, ducky8882003.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com.au (Kris) wrote:

>animals r just animals

· Since the animals we raise for food would not be alive
if we didn't raise them for that purpose, it's a distortion of
reality not to take that fact into consideration whenever
we think about the fact that the animals are going to be
killed. The animals are not being cheated out of any part
of their life by being raised for food, but instead they are
experiencing whatever life they get as a result of it. ·
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

<dh_ld.DeleteThis@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:ud25qvsmqit6g6a8fcv5mfa8oapbp077lk@4ax.com...
> On 30 Oct 2003 19:56:07 -0800, ducky8882003.DeleteThis@yahoo.com.au (Kris) wrote:
>
> >animals r just animals
>
> · Since the animals we raise for food would not be alive
> if we didn't raise them for that purpose, it's a distortion of
> reality not to take that fact into consideration whenever
> we think about the fact that the animals are going to be
> killed. The animals are not being cheated out of any part
> of their life by being raised for food, but instead they are
> experiencing whatever life they get as a result of it. ·

Some might say the actual 'raising for food' is the abomination and that it
is unnatural.
Suppose humans were raised just specifically to die in a war?
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

Russt wrote:
>
> <dh_ld.DeleteThis@nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:ud25qvsmqit6g6a8fcv5mfa8oapbp077lk@4ax.com...
> > On 30 Oct 2003 19:56:07 -0800, ducky8882003.DeleteThis@yahoo.com.au (Kris) wrote:
> >
> > >animals r just animals
> >
> > · Since the animals we raise for food would not be alive
> > if we didn't raise them for that purpose, it's a distortion of
> > reality not to take that fact into consideration whenever
> > we think about the fact that the animals are going to be
> > killed. The animals are not being cheated out of any part
> > of their life by being raised for food, but instead they are
> > experiencing whatever life they get as a result of it. ·

> Some might say the actual 'raising for food' is the abomination and that it
> is unnatural.

Then again, others might say that people would be foolish not to take
full advantage of ALL available food sources, since variety defines
balance and moderation, which are critical to any enduring and healthy
species, and that's about as natural as it gets.


> Suppose humans were raised just specifically to die in a war?


You've been talking to Rumsfeld again, haven't you?
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

"Russt" <Blooa RemoveThis @delp.nest> wrote in message
news:SyAob.477$Bf7.403517@news1.news.adelphia.net...
>
> <dh_ld RemoveThis @nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:ud25qvsmqit6g6a8fcv5mfa8oapbp077lk@4ax.com...
> > On 30 Oct 2003 19:56:07 -0800, ducky8882003 RemoveThis @yahoo.com.au (Kris) wrote:
> >
> > >animals r just animals
> >
> > · Since the animals we raise for food would not be alive
> > if we didn't raise them for that purpose, it's a distortion of
> > reality not to take that fact into consideration whenever
> > we think about the fact that the animals are going to be
> > killed. The animals are not being cheated out of any part
> > of their life by being raised for food, but instead they are
> > experiencing whatever life they get as a result of it. ·
>
> Some might say the actual 'raising for food' is the abomination and that
it
> is unnatural.
> Suppose humans were raised just specifically to die in a war?
>
>

Compare like with like.
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

"Mark Earnest" <gmearnest.TakeThisOut@airSPAMLESSmail.net> wrote in message
news:bnumbd$mfe@library2.airnews.net...
> "andy-k" <spam.drain.TakeThisOut@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:hOnob.2333$mV1.917918@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
> > "Kris" <ducky8882003.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:ad856af6.0310301956.27650d2@posting.google.com...
> > > animals r just animals
> >
> > Define "animal"
>
> lower life form

What would constitute an example of a *higher* life form?
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

andy-k wrote:
>
> "Mark Earnest" <gmearnest.DeleteThis@airSPAMLESSmail.net> wrote in message
> news:bnumbd$mfe@library2.airnews.net...
> > "andy-k" <spam.drain.DeleteThis@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> > news:hOnob.2333$mV1.917918@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
> > > "Kris" <ducky8882003.DeleteThis@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> > > news:ad856af6.0310301956.27650d2@posting.google.com...
> > > > animals r just animals
> > >
> > > Define "animal"
> >
> > lower life form
>
> What would constitute an example of a *higher* life form?

A human
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

> · Since the animals we raise for food would not be alive
> if we didn't raise them

What alive 'animals' are you referring to? The one's that are alive and the
ones that aren't?
What animal isn't alive?
JJ

<dh_ld.RemoveThis@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:ud25qvsmqit6g6a8fcv5mfa8oapbp077lk@4ax.com...
> On 30 Oct 2003 19:56:07 -0800, ducky8882003.RemoveThis@yahoo.com.au (Kris) wrote:
>
> >animals r just animals
>
> · Since the animals we raise for food would not be alive
> if we didn't raise them for that purpose, it's a distortion of
> reality not to take that fact into consideration whenever
> we think about the fact that the animals are going to be
> killed. The animals are not being cheated out of any part
> of their life by being raised for food, but instead they are
> experiencing whatever life they get as a result of it. ·
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

John Jones wrote:

>> · Since the animals we raise for food would not be alive
>>if we didn't raise them
>
>
> What alive 'animals' are you referring to? The one's that are alive and the
> ones that aren't?
> What animal isn't alive?

The original poster, Fuckwit - formerly known as David
Harrison - has a stupid angle for trying to beat up on
"vegans". He says that they're doing evil by wanting
to prevent farm animals from being born.

"vegans", of course, eat no meat, the reason being they
believe it is immoral to kill animals for that purpose
(or pretty much any purpose, except maybe self
defense.) Fuckwit claims to believe that it is morally
acceptable to kill animals for meat, and in fact,
Fuckwit believes that humans are doing a morally good
deed by "providing life" to farm animals.

Fuckwit is merely trying to play a little rhetorical
trick on "vegans". He's trying to piggy back on their
moral outrage, while redirectly it back at them. Thus,
he says it isn't morally wrong to kill animals for
human use, but that it *is* wrong to prevent them from
being born.

Fuckwit believes that unconceived farm animals "exist"
in some sense, and that "vegans" are doing them wrong.

Don't pay him any further attention. You won't get an
honest answer out of him, ever.

Hope that helps.
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

>He says that they're doing evil by wanting
> to prevent farm animals from being born.

What's a farm animal that isn't born? Does it need feeding? Can I eat it?
What's a prevented farm animal? Does it need feeding? Can I eat it?


JJ

"Jonathan Ball" <jonball.DeleteThis@whitehouse.not> wrote in message
news:ivDob.10382$Px2.9062@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> John Jones wrote:
>
> >> · Since the animals we raise for food would not be alive
> >>if we didn't raise them
> >
> >
> > What alive 'animals' are you referring to? The one's that are alive and
the
> > ones that aren't?
> > What animal isn't alive?
>
> The original poster, Fuckwit - formerly known as David
> Harrison - has a stupid angle for trying to beat up on
> "vegans". He says that they're doing evil by wanting
> to prevent farm animals from being born.
>
> "vegans", of course, eat no meat, the reason being they
> believe it is immoral to kill animals for that purpose
> (or pretty much any purpose, except maybe self
> defense.) Fuckwit claims to believe that it is morally
> acceptable to kill animals for meat, and in fact,
> Fuckwit believes that humans are doing a morally good
> deed by "providing life" to farm animals.
>
> Fuckwit is merely trying to play a little rhetorical
> trick on "vegans". He's trying to piggy back on their
> moral outrage, while redirectly it back at them. Thus,
> he says it isn't morally wrong to kill animals for
> human use, but that it *is* wrong to prevent them from
> being born.
>
> Fuckwit believes that unconceived farm animals "exist"
> in some sense, and that "vegans" are doing them wrong.
>
> Don't pay him any further attention. You won't get an
> honest answer out of him, ever.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

John Jones wrote:

> How does a farm animal that isn't born suffer a loss?

You'll have to ask Fuckwit. He's the one who thinks
"they" can suffer a loss. I think that's nuts.

> Is it because I forgot to feed it?

No. In Fuckwit's bizarre world, it would be because
you prevented it from being born and "getting to
experience life".

> Can I eat it anyway?

No.

> Are you sure of who's side you are on?

Yes.
 >> Stay informed about: animals 

"island" <island DeleteThis @sundial.net> wrote in message
news:3FA2ED84.582F951A@sundial.net...
> andy-k wrote:
> > "Mark Earnest" <gmearnest DeleteThis @airSPAMLESSmail.net> wrote in message
> > news:bnumbd$mfe@library2.airnews.net...
> > > "andy-k" <spam.drain DeleteThis @ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> > > news:hOnob.2333$mV1.917918@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
> > > > "Kris" <ducky8882003 DeleteThis @yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> > > > news:ad856af6.0310301956.27650d2@posting.google.com...
> > > > > animals r just animals
> > > >
> > > > Define "animal"
> > >
> > > lower life form
> >
> > What would constitute an example of a *higher* life form?
>
> A human

What is it about the definition of "animal" that excludes humans?
 >> Stay informed about: animals