Go back
Ribs and beer

Ribs and beer

General

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Aiko
You'll win no discussion or respect with words like these, no matter how right or wrong you are...
i am here to speak the truth. Go back and hide your head in the sand my man. 😉

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by eldragonfly
yeah, they are acting like sissyboys, but that's just my opinion. win an argument with a "mmmboy! eat meat it tastes good" deranged selfish fool, or a psychopathic sub-human hunter and animal killer. yeesh.
I haven't heard a good argument from the meat eaters yet that doesn't revolve around the fact of self enjoyment over pain and misery.

Being selfish must be very important on the old list.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by eldragonfly
i am here to speak the truth. Go back and hide your head in the sand my man. 😉
It doesn't help much to speak the truth if you do it in a way that will put off those in need to hear it.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nordlys
It doesn't help much to speak the truth if you do it in a way that will put off those in need to hear it.
Pretty much like the cries of lab animals.

I worked with two girls who used to laugh when they did it, do you think they listened.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by eldragonfly
Mimor pay attention! There is no such thing as ethical murder, get it together man. And i find it rather strange that you seek to "classify" different types of ignorance, putting some retarded selfish sub-human who hunt his next meal with a loaded gun or worse, on a pedestal above the mindless consumption of food.
It's certainly preferable to have the animal live out its existence free in the wild, and then have it all suddenly come to an end with a hunter's bullet.

Preferable, that is, to raising animals in captivity...knee-deep in their own feces, pumping them full of hormones and antibiotics and then slitting their throats in a slaughterhouse.

Not desirable, but preferable.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Woodgie
I haven't heard a good argument from the meat eaters yet that doesn't revolve around the fact of self enjoyment over pain and misery.

Being selfish must be very important on the old list.
Actually, Mr. Mikelom made a good argument (in my opinion) that was rather simple:

"Innocent animals, as you put it, kill others to satisfy their base desire also. It is fortunate we are at the top of the chain to choose..."

And don't forget what Kurt said:

"It's okay to eat fish because they haven't any feelings."

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by darvlay

And don't forget what Kurt said:

"It's okay to eat fish because they haven't any feelings."
That surely is scientificically based...

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Aiko
Social stupidity, I'd call this.
Irrelevant.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Woodgie
Pretty much like the cries of lab animals.

I worked with two girls who used to laugh when they did it, do you think they listened.
I'd say you'd still have much better chances to convince someone that way than by calling them "retarded selfish sub-human". The latter is a pretty sure way to make them blind and deaf to whatever you have to say.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Woodgie
I haven't heard a good argument from the meat eaters yet that doesn't revolve around the fact of self enjoyment over pain and misery.

Being selfish must be very important on the old list.
Yes. i was going to throw in the ideas of blind consumerism and blatant commercialism into the mix also, but the tired obfuscations in evidence here lead nowhere.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nordlys
I'd say you'd still have much better chances to convince someone that way than by calling them "retarded selfish sub-human". The latter is a pretty sure way to make them blind and deaf to whatever you have to say.
You are not wrong and my apologies.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nordlys
I'd say you'd still have much better chances to convince someone that way than by calling them "retarded selfish sub-human". The latter is a pretty sure way to make them blind and deaf to whatever you have to say.
Nordlys i disagree, and strongly so. There clearly is a lack of commonsense and respect that your comical protrayal affords them, the redundant and oafish commentary isn't even worthy of comment.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by eldragonfly
Nordlys i disagree, and strongly so. There clearly is a lack of commonsense and respect that your comical protrayal affords them, the redundant and oafish commentary isn't even worthy of comment.
In my short life I have a lot of time for folk like you.

Would you be prepared for an animal to suffer for your words presented here?

In my experience, the people you are describing won't take it out on you but the things around them.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by rbmorris
It's certainly preferable to have the animal live out its existence free in the wild, and then have it all suddenly come to an end with a hunter's bullet.
You cannot quantify suffering or put a "pricetag' on life, or just find it convenient to ignore crimes against nature, no matter what forms it takes. Here, let's take a second look at your sadistic viewpoint.



"Hunting purely for your sadistic enjoyment and fun is disgusting and babaric, and hearing this innocent bear cry from such a sensless cruel and wasteful kill is just gut wrenching."

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Woodgie
In my short life I have a lot of time for folk like you.

Would you be prepared for an animal to suffer for your words presented here?

In my experience, the people you are describing won't take it out on you but the things around them.
well then if you agree obviously it is *beyond* silly to placate these selfish macaroons, and it is wrong to coddle them and dance around the truth.