On 3/8/2012 12:48 AM, Rupert wrote:
> On Mar 7, 9:32 pm, George > wrote:
>> "glen" or "mark" or "little cocksucker" - the friend of Lesley Simon,
>> the Whore of Ballaghaderreen, County Roscommon - has it. He shares
>> moral responsibility for the animal CDs caused in order to put food on
>> his plate. This cannot be rationally disputed.
>>
>> His relationship with the hands-on killers of animals has these elements:
>>
>> * the relationship is voluntary - no coercion applied to the principal
>>
>> * the principal is an active participant, i.e., actively engages in
>> the relationship such as, for example, going to the grocery
>>
>> * the principal is fully aware of the agent's actions
>>
>> * the relationship is not instrumentally necessary for the principal to
>> achieve a legitimate goal, e.g. the acquisition of food
>>
>
> If I am to remain employed at the University of Münster, I do need to
> buy the products of commercial agriculture in order to obtain food.

So? There is no need to remain so employed; that's a *want* that you have.


> I really don't think there's any way around that. So presumably you
> would claim that remaining employed at the University of Münster is
> not a "legitimate goal".

You are making a choice. You must bear all moral responsibility for the
consequences of your choice.

You keep losing sight of the fact that I am not telling you to cause
zero animal deaths or harm. I'm instructing you to stop making the
false conclusion you make about the meaning of not putting animal bits
in your mouth. You are not following a "cruelty free" diet, and you are
not "minimizing" the harm you cause. You must admit that your
conclusion about your moral position due to adhering to the false belief
system of "veganism" is false.