| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,alt.zen,alt.philosophy.zen,rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Is the world better off for having more animals?
On 6/24/2010 12:22 PM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote: On 6/24/2010 12:11 PM, oxtail wrote: Fred C. Dobbs wrote: On 6/24/2010 11:59 AM, oxtail wrote: Fred C. Dobbs wrote: On 6/24/2010 11:18 AM, oxtail wrote: [...] No, the world is not better off. The world does not have a welfare. I didn't ask for your opinion. I didn't give you an opinion. Are they factual statements? Yes. If so, are they falsifiable? Have a go at it. Care to show us how? Do your own homework, fat boy. |
|
#12
posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,alt.zen,alt.philosophy.zen,rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is the world better off for having more animals?
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:
On 6/24/2010 12:22 PM, oxtail wrote: Fred C. Dobbs wrote: On 6/24/2010 12:11 PM, oxtail wrote: Fred C. Dobbs wrote: On 6/24/2010 11:59 AM, oxtail wrote: Fred C. Dobbs wrote: On 6/24/2010 11:18 AM, oxtail wrote: [...] No, the world is not better off. The world does not have a welfare. I didn't ask for your opinion. I didn't give you an opinion. Are they factual statements? Yes. If so, are they falsifiable? Have a go at it. Care to show us how? Do your own homework, fat boy. Are you withdrawing your statements? -- Oxtail is not doing what he thinks he is doing here. |
|
#13
posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan,alt.zen,alt.philosophy.zen,rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is the world better off for having more animals?
On 6/24/2010 12:30 PM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote: On 6/24/2010 12:22 PM, oxtail wrote: Fred C. Dobbs wrote: On 6/24/2010 12:11 PM, oxtail wrote: Fred C. Dobbs wrote: On 6/24/2010 11:59 AM, oxtail wrote: Fred C. Dobbs wrote: On 6/24/2010 11:18 AM, oxtail wrote: [...] No, the world is not better off. The world does not have a welfare. I didn't ask for your opinion. I didn't give you an opinion. Are they factual statements? Yes. If so, are they falsifiable? Have a go at it. Care to show us how? Do your own homework, fat boy. Are you withdrawing your statements? No, fat boy. |
|
#14
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Consideration for the lives of farm animals" - meaningless tripe
On Jun 24, 1:27*am, "Fred C. Dobbs"
wrote: All it means is wanting the animals to exist. *If someone wants the animals that ****wit wishes to eat to exist, then ****wit says the person has "consideration for their lives". *If someone doesn't want those animals to exist, then ****wit shrieks they have "no consideration for their lives", and he berates them for not wanting the animals to exist. It's ****witted tripe; nothing more. So is this ****wit thread, and the author.Cross-posting douchebag. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
