On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:55:22 -0700, Goo wrote:

>On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:05:44 -0400, dh@. wrote:
>
>>>dh quoted Goo:
>>>>On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 00:30:32 -0700, Goo wrote:
>>>>>On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 13:13:55 -0400, dh@. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Humans have as much justification to kill other animals as other animals
>>>>>>have to kill humans and other animals Goo. Some people are capable of moving on
>>>>>>beyond that point and actually consider the animals themselves and what's good
>>>>>>and bad for them. Others of you only want to consider bad things because and
>>>>>>only because considering positive aspects for millions of livestock animals
>>>>>>works against the elimination objective.
>>>>>
>>>>>Show it.
>>>>
>>>>"the nutritionally unnecessary choice deliberately to kill an animal
>>>>ALWAYS causes a moral harm greater in magnitude than . . . the
>>>>moral "benefit" realized by the animal in existing at all" - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude
>>>>than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing
>>>>of the animals erases all of it." - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"it is not "better" that the animal exist, no matter
>>>>its quality of live" - Goo
>>>>
>>>>""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of
>>>>their deaths" - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"Causing animals to be born and "get to experience life"
>>>>(in ****wit's wretched prose) is no mitigation at all for
>>>>killing them." - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"Life "justifying" death is the stupidest goddamned thing
>>>>you ever wrote." - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"NO livestock benefit from being farmed." - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"No farm animals benefit from farming." - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"There is nothing to "appreciate" about the livestock "getting
>>>>to experience life" - Goo
>>>>
>>>>"one MUST conclude that not raising them in the first place is the
>>>>ethically superior choice." - Goo
>>>
>>>You didn't show it.
>>
>> I showed that you only want to consider bad things because and only because
>>considering positive aspects for millions of livestock animals works against the
>>elimination objective, Goo.
>
>You

Goober as always if you want people to think you think you disagree with
yourself about any of your quotes then YOU need to try explaining HOW you want
people to think you think you do. But you can't even make an attempt Goob
because you agree with yourself about every bit of it. You agree with yourself
about every one of the quotes I presented, Goo.