Scented Nectar wrote:

> "Rudy Canoza" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>Scented Nectar wrote:
>>
>>>"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>>Scented Nectar wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"usual suspect" > wrote in message
. ..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Scented Nectar wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Ron" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>news:1121710299.089384.313110@g14g2000cwa. googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>dh@. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Goobernicus Gonad--the moron who thinks he's a genius
>>>>>>>>>>and enjoys being referred to simply as "Goo"--has proven
>>>>>>>>>>himself an incredible coward. He has done that by cowardly
>>>>>>>>>>declining to answer questions and perform things which he
>>>>>>>>>>has boasted of being able to do. Some of the things he is
>>>>>>>>>>afraid to even attempt include:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>1. explaining exactly which emotions animals can and
>>>>>>>>>> can not experience
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>2. explaining how anything could have inherent rights
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>3. providing any opposition at all to "AR"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>4. explaining why nothing has ever benefitted from living
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>5. explaining why we should only consider killing but not life
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>6. explaining what or whom--other than those who are
>>>>>>>>>> disturbed by the fact that humans eat meat--would benefit
>>>>>>>>>> from their elimination objective
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>7. describe any emotion(s) through language
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>8. explaining any way(s) in which people could contribute to
>>>>>>>>>> better lives for food animals.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>9. explaining why one emotion is more difficult to experience
>>>>>>>>>> than another.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>10. explaining how any difference between the ability of humans
>
> and
>
>>>>>>>>>> other animals to experience emotions, is a moral issue.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>11. explaining the qualitative differences between anger and
>>>>>>>>>> disappointment, if there are any.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>12. demonstrating an ethically equivalent or superior
>
> alternative
>
>>>>>>>>>> to the elimination of domestic animals.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>13. explaining what it is that makes animals appear to be
>>>>>
>>>>>experiencing
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> certain emotions, under conditions which could easily
>
> trigger
>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>those
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> particular emotions, if it is not those particular
>
> emotions.
>
>>>>>>>>>>14. explaining how any emotions could be dependant on language.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>15. explaining the kind of stimulus-response "anticipation" you
>
> can
>
>>>>>get
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> from a dog
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, he most surely is my goober, as we proved again and
>
> again
>
>>>>>>>>>>and again.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>He's your own personal "Goobernicus Goober".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>LOL!!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>He's Gooby Goo, a dissappointed
>>>>>>>>cartoon dog. )
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You're Skanky the ****, the 42 year old, unmarried, childless,
>>>>>>>degreeless, scut-working marginal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>...who takes the bus because she has no car.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Your need to fish is pathetic.
>>>>
>>>>Not fishing. You've already admitted you take the bus. Your
>
> sanctimony,
>
>>>>with all your tap-dancing between "killing animals is wrong" and "I
>>>>can't be bothered to practice what I preach," is much more pathetic
>
> than
>
>>>>anything which you can ever accuse anyone else.
>>>
>>>Wow, have you ever gotten things
>>>****ed up there.
>>
>>He didn't get anything ****ed up.
>
>
> Yes he did.

He didn't get anything ****ed up.


>>>You used "quotes" in the above
>>>making it sound like my words.
>>>You know full well that I think
>>>killing animals is *mostly* wrong.
>>
>>No. You can't. You can't leap 20 feet into the air, you can't lift
>>100 kg of weight over your head, and you can't think it's "mostly"
>>wrong to kill animals. It is impossible. If you insist you to think
>>it, then you are admitting to mental illness.
>
>
> I CAN believe it's mostly wrong
> to kill animals,

You cannot.


> and no, that's not
> a mental disorder.

Yes, it is.


> You obsessive-compulsive needs

None.


> to make things into absolutes
> though are mental.

It's not I making anything absolute. Some things just
are. Adults accept it. Retarded juveniles like you
think they don't need to accept it. You're wrong.

By definition, it cannot be "mostly" wrong to kill
animals. It can be wrong in some cases and not in
others, e.g. if self defense comes into it, but in any
*given* case, either it's wrong or it isn't. It is
logically impossible for your "mostly". That's just
how it is.


>>>You also know full well that I do
>>>believe that I practice what I
>>>preach.
>>
>>It doesn't matter if you "believe" that you practice what you preach.
>>Your beliefs are irrelvant. It is objectively true that you do *not*
>>practice what you preach. We also note that you claim to believe it is
>>"mostly" wrong to kill animals, and that belief is impossible for a
>>rational and thinking person to hold. Your statements of what you
>>believe you think and do are wholly immaterial.
>
>
> My beliefs are very relevant

Your beliefs are wholly irrelevant. It is objectively
true that you do *not* practice what you preach, and no
part of your beliefs can change that fact.