Fishing while playing chess

Originally posted by eldragonfly
uh huh. Your point appears to be that eating fruits, grains and plants is immoral, but killing and eating fish and animals is not. That is just plain selfish, ignorant and petty, yet typical "head in the sand" shallow speciesist thinking. Like i said before, totally unscientific, unsound, childish and stupid. and you seem quick to ignore my comparisons o ...[text shortened]... ess, that they had an undeniable right to own slaves, human beings, because they were savages.

Eating meat to keep healthy is not greedy and slave owners have nothing to do with this so there is no comparison to ignore.


Edit: and my point is that they are equal. One cannot be moral while the other is immoral and vice versa.

and tomtom232 you are still wallowing around in the profane and shallow unscientific muck as before. you are just making things up as you go along there is no validity at all, no rhyme no reason to your rather careless statements and exceedingly dull suggestions. your statements are not redeemable and have no basis in reality. Your witless interpretations and worthless biases speak for themselves.

Originally posted by eldragonfly
and tomtom232 you are still wallowing around in the profane and shallow unscientific muck as before. you are just making things up as you go along there is no validity at all, no rhyme no reason to your rather careless statements and exceedingly dull suggestions. your statements are not redeemable and have no basis in reality. Your witless interpretations and worthless biases speak for themselves.

I am the one who is biased? I'll have you know that I don't eat poultry, beef, venison or veal. I only eat fish and ersatz. Bias would for me to go around and try to proclaim those are the only things you can eat. Hmm, who does that remind me of?

This is all really pointless anyway. If you are trying to persuade me then you have gone about it the wrong way and failed miserably and if you are trying to prove me wrong, you can't because there is not enough evidence either way and any evidence that can be provided on the morality or immorality of eating meat is purely speculative and subject to ones own interpretation which is why such matters are up to the opinion of the individual.

Originally posted by tomtom232
This is all really pointless anyway.

Wrong. Your unoriginal statements and worthless insights lack validity, but that's not true for the numerous other points raised in this thread.

Originally posted by eldragonfly
Wrong. Your unoriginal statements and worthless insights lack validity, but that's not true for the numerous other points raised in this thread.

First you say that I make up all my statements as I go and then you call them unoriginal. 😵

It is also interesting how you don't even read my statements, as is very clear by most of you abhorring rebuttles, before you pass judgement on them.

Originally posted by tomtom232
First you say that I make up all my statements as I go and then you call them unoriginal. 😵

It is also interesting how you don't even read my statements, as is very clear by most of you abhorring rebuttles, before you pass judgement on them.

*yawn* and tomtom232 it's obvious to me you either lack the critical thinking skillz to carry on a proper discussion or are just regurgitating paperthin speciesist propaganda and/or unfortunate rhetoric. Either way the childish, remote and superficial points you raise are irrelevant, that is why i say you have said nothing original.

Originally posted by eldragonfly
*yawn* and tomtom232 it's obvious to me you lack the critical thinking skillz to carry on a proper discussion. The childish points you raise are irrelevant, that is why i say you have said nothing original.

Wrong. You can lie to the forums but you can't lie to yourself. Relevance and originality are to entirely different things and you know that.

Originally posted by tomtom232
Wrong. You can lie to the forums but you can't lie to yourself. Relevance and originality are to entirely different things and you know that.

ad hominem = logical fallacy. but just to keep it interesting, summarize your position again.

Originally posted by Nordlys
Chess songs? Tell me more about it!

In Gufeld's book, 'Searching for the Mona Lisa' a really good and
honest book. He mentions playing in a tournament and falling
in love with a girl player who he sees across the playing hall.

So I wrote a wee song about this:

Final Verse.

'I like the way her long blonde hair falls onto her first rank.'
I like the way her slender fingers play with her Knights.'

I'm in love with the girl who sits at board 24....
...and I wish...I knew....her opening...

It went quite well - got a big applause.