"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote
>> [..]
>>
>> >> > The vegan mitigates their responsibility by following all the rules
>> >> > and
>> >> > the laws associated with killing animals.
>> >>
>> >> There are no rules and laws associated with killing animals, no such
>> >> law
>> >> is
>> >> even feasible. Vegans have fabricated a morality outside the normal
>> >> one,
>> >> with moral rules involving animals that go far beyond it, yet they
>> >> live
>> >> in
>> >> the comfort and protection of the normal moral system with it's cheap
>> >> affordable food and health care. If they are going to preach an
>> >> outlandish
>> >> moral system and preach to me that I ought to follow it, they need to
>> >> follow
>> >> it first. Cutting down on animal products is not nearly enough to
>> >> validate
>> >> their alleged moral system.
>> >
>> > "Normal moral system?" What's that about. I was taught to eat meat and
>> > I
>> > was taught which meats were acceptable and socially acceptable eat.
>>
>> Customs.
>
> Thank you. Customs are taught and learned. They are not biological or
> genetic. They are common and popular.

Therefore bad according to you.

>> > Of course, your argument has been disputed and your simply ignored the
>> > formations that clearly demonstrated the double standard that you
>> > applied to the vegan.
>>
>> Not at all, you have utterly misconstrued the arguments all along the
>> way.
>>
>> >> > Come on, Dutch. You lost.
>> >>
>> >> Phaw.. in your dreams. Wake up!
>> >
>> > I clearly demonstrated this. When your own logic was presented with a
>> > different example, you simply commented that you didn't have the time
>> > to
>> > do all that was necessary to follow through.
>>
>> Your examples were nothing but a convoluted mess based on fallacies. I do
>> not have the time to completely untangle your mixed-up thinking, you must
>> do
>> some of the work yourself.
>
> the work was done. All the was required was that you clarify why you
> applied one standard to the vegan and another to yourself.
>
>> If you would learn to listen, instead of playing devil's advocate on
>> every
>> point to attempt to "score", you might get somewhere. Playing devil's
>> advocate is exactly as valid as agreeing with everything you read.
>
> Listen? I'm reading your comments.

You're reading but graspinf anything. I typically make a series of replies
in a post, most of which you breeze over because you are being corrected,
than you insert some non-sequitor knee-jerk remark at the end.

Your approach is WORTHLESS.

> Where you consider me being Devil's Advocate, I consider you blindly
> introjecting what is spoonfed.

False, unlike you I do NOT blindly reject that which is "spoonfed" in favour
of irrational claptrap.