Ron wrote:

> In article . net>,
> Jay Santos > wrote:
>
>
>>If you believe that something is absolutely morally
>>wrong, then the ONLY coherently explicable amount of it
>>you may do, and remain consistent with your belief, is
>>zero. If you do any of it, then you clearly do not
>>believe it to be absolutely wrong.
>>
>>If you genuinely believe it to be absolutely wrong to
>>kill animals other than in provable self defense, then
>>you may not morally participate in any activity or
>>process that kills animals. If you do so participate,
>>then clearly you do not believe killing animals to be
>>absolutely wrong.
>>
>>Once you've admitted that it isn't absolutely wrong,
>>then you're going to have a very difficult time
>>explaining in what way it is relatively wrong. In
>>particular, you're going to have an all but impossible
>>task to explain why the amount in which you engage or
>>indirectly participate is in any sense "better" than
>>what someone else does.
>
>
> that makes you complicit in rape, child molestation, murder and so on.

Nope. I don't do any of those, and I do not
participate in any process that leads to any as an
intrinsic part of the process.

You're just ****ed, sophomore.