On May 31, 1:13 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> ****wit David Harrison, hopelessly overmatched as always, lied:
>
> > On 30 May 2007 12:41:47 -0700, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>
> > >They have no intrinsic moral meaning until and unless
> > >the livestock exist.
>
> > If you think you have any clue about any of this Rudy,
>
> Much, much more than a clue, ****wit. I have done the entire
> analysis.


bWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Is that like your EXPLANATION of how cows are raised for 12 years
exclusively to become pet food?





>
> > then attempt to explain any sort of meaning you're able
> > to comprehend and appreciate regarding livestock who
> > do exist.
>
> ****wit, you stupid pig-****ing cracker: we *always* and *only* have
> been talking about the "consideration" you wish to give livestock
> *PRIOR* to their existence. You are far too stupid and inept and shit-
> brained to try to get away with the switch you just attempted, you
> stupid ****.



What eloquence!!
Douche will be proud of you Goo.




>
> > Don't even refer to your imaginary nonexistent
> > "entities" Rudy,
>
> No, ****wit - YOUR "imaginary nonexistent 'entities'", except,
> ****wit, that you stupidly and irrationally think they exist. This
> has *always* and *only* been about YOUR belief that the "future farm
> animals" are, today, morally considerable entities. They are not,
> and you are a ****wit.



Goo,...yer so elegant.
Even Douche says so...........but can you EXPLAIN any of it?