In article . net>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Ron wrote:
> > In article >,
> > usual suspect > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Twink Ron wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>>>>This ignores the fact that animals die in the course of "vegan" food
> >>>>>>>>production, too. Those deaths -- through poisoning, mutilation,
> >>>>>>>>drowning, predation, etc. -- are significantly more "cruel" than the
> >>>>>>>>humane slaughter which they object.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Killed, of course, by meat eaters.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>You mean by meat-eating farmers hired by urbanite vegans to produce
> >>>>>>food
> >>>>>>at the lowest possible price rather than the most peculiar set of
> >>>>>>pseudo-ethics. Vegans are hypocritical scumbags, and so are you for so
> >>>>>>feebly attempting to defend them.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Scumbag? *hand goes to forehead in shock and horror*
> >>>>
> >>>>Drama queen.
> >>>
> >>>*bats eye lashes in flattered state*
> >>
> >>It's not flattery. Well, not to normal people.
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>I find you evasive.
> >>>>
> >>>>Pot calling the kettle black. You write I'm evasive, while others have
> >>>>written extensively that I'm too blunt.
> >>>
> >>>Blunt, as in being rude and abusive is different than evasive, as in
> >>>elaborating on any point further than ....well, you know the drill.
> >>
> >>Some consider the elaborating to be rude and abusive: the truth hurts.
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>Please clarify what ethical or moral code that any
> >>>>>vegan is violating.
> >>>>
> >>>>Easy: *their own*.
> >>>
> >>>I'll clarify,
> >>
> >>You're not clarifying, Twink, you're trying to evade the issue. Vegans
> >>prate about their high standards and then have a perverse indifference
> >>to the net results of their diet. Their standard is not causing animal
> >>suffering and death. The *results* of their lifestyles are filled with
> >>animal suffering and death. They have other options available to them to
> >>minimize animal suffering and death, but they're content to make
> >>meaningless gestures, such as their irrational obsessions about animal
> >>parts.
> >>
> >>
> >>>what is the moral principle that you believe the vegan is
> >>>violating when you state that they are not following their own moral
> >>>code.
> >>
> >>It's a peculiar one of their own design, applied with tremendous amounts
> >>of hypocrisy and sanctimony.
> >>
> >>
> >>>Is this the platinum rule, the golden, or some other unnamed moral
> >>>code?
> >>
> >>It's an oxymoron called "vegan ethics."
> >
> >
> > Oh, if only it were true that vegans believed as you did that they are
> > some hom responsible for the actions and outcomes of others.
>
> He doesn't believe that "vegans" are responsible for
> the actions of other. He believes, quite rightly, that
> they share in responsibility for the deaths of animals
> that are caused to produced the food they eat.

What principle causes shared responsibility for another's actions. I can
attribute as much responsibility as I care to others, but the reality of
the situation is that when I type my response I am in complete control
of my actions. I could blame you. I wouldn't respond if you didn't type
your response. But again, I am the one operating my body and the
keyboard. I can attribute responsibility to any other poster here.
Again, I am the one operating my computer and deciding which words will
be entered into the appropriate screen and clicking "send".

> I suspect you *could* know that if you wanted to, but
> because you're a snarky little sophist interested
> solely in the appearance of cleverness rather than the
> substance of learning, you choose to keep your eyes
> firmly shut. Nice.

*sniffles in mock hurt*