On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus no welfare, so
coming into existence cannot improve an entity's welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock animals by breeding
them into existence; we do not do them any "favor". We facilitate
their existence, but that existence is not a gift or benefit to
them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be once they do
exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if, suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock animals into
existence. The fact that "billions of farm animals" would thereby
never exist would have no moral meaning to any animals. There would
not be any lack of consideration shown.


If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have no business to
worry
about what other people do or think.


of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the existence of
them in future. in particular, existence being bred for meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.


You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.


just a period of pain on earth.


But necessary to be enlightened.


the unborn don't give a flying ****.

bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus no welfare, so
coming into existence cannot improve an entity's welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock animals by breeding
them into existence; we do not do them any "favor". We facilitate
their existence, but that existence is not a gift or benefit to
them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be once they do
exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if, suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock animals into
existence. The fact that "billions of farm animals" would thereby
never exist would have no moral meaning to any animals. There
would not be any lack of consideration shown.


If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have no business
to worry
about what other people do or think.


of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the existence of
them in future. in particular, existence being bred for meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.


You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.


just a period of pain on earth.


But necessary to be enlightened.


the unborn don't give a flying ****.


But her parents should.
Her society also.

--
Oxtail is not doing what he thinks he is doing here.

On 1/07/2010 2:36 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus no welfare, so
coming into existence cannot improve an entity's welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock animals by breeding
them into existence; we do not do them any "favor". We facilitate
their existence, but that existence is not a gift or benefit to
them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be once they do
exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if, suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock animals into
existence. The fact that "billions of farm animals" would thereby
never exist would have no moral meaning to any animals. There
would not be any lack of consideration shown.


If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have no business
to worry
about what other people do or think.


of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the existence of
them in future. in particular, existence being bred for meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.


You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.


just a period of pain on earth.


But necessary to be enlightened.


the unborn don't give a flying ****.


But her parents should.
Her society also.


i think life is sacred in the sense
that i wouldn't bring someone here if
myself or the world weren't up to it.

bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:36 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus no welfare,
so coming into existence cannot improve an entity's welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock animals by
breeding them into existence; we do not do them any "favor". We
facilitate their existence, but that existence is not a gift or
benefit to them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be
once they do exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if, suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock animals into
existence. The fact that "billions of farm animals" would
thereby never exist would have no moral meaning to any animals.
There would not be any lack of consideration shown.


If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have no business
to worry
about what other people do or think.


of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the existence
of them in future. in particular, existence being bred for meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.


You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.


just a period of pain on earth.


But necessary to be enlightened.


the unborn don't give a flying ****.


But her parents should.
Her society also.


i think life is sacred in the sense
that i wouldn't bring someone here if myself or the world weren't up to
it.


Do you ever just do what you do?

--
Oxtail is not doing what he thinks he is doing here.

On 1/07/2010 3:35 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:36 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus no welfare,
so coming into existence cannot improve an entity's welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock animals by
breeding them into existence; we do not do them any "favor". We
facilitate their existence, but that existence is not a gift or
benefit to them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be
once they do exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if, suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock animals into
existence. The fact that "billions of farm animals" would
thereby never exist would have no moral meaning to any animals.
There would not be any lack of consideration shown.


If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have no business
to worry
about what other people do or think.


of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the existence
of them in future. in particular, existence being bred for meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.


You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.


just a period of pain on earth.


But necessary to be enlightened.


the unborn don't give a flying ****.


But her parents should.
Her society also.


i think life is sacred in the sense
that i wouldn't bring someone here if myself or the world weren't up to
it.


Do you ever just do what you do?


if there's a sink and soap free soap
and a box of paper towels near by.

On Jun 30, 2:34*pm, bundling snowfalls wrote:
On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:





bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus no welfare, so
coming into existence cannot improve an entity's welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock animals by breeding
them into existence; we do not do them any "favor". *We facilitate
their existence, but that existence is not a gift or benefit to
them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be once they do
exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if, suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock animals into
existence. *The fact that "billions of farm animals" would thereby
never exist would have no moral meaning to any animals. *There would
not be any lack of consideration shown.

If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have no business to
worry
about what other people do or think.

of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the existence of
them in future. in particular, existence being bred for meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.

You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.

just a period of pain on earth.

But necessary to be enlightened.

the unborn don't give a flying ****.


for the birds?

^~

On 1/07/2010 5:39 AM, zenworm wrote:
On Jun 30, 2:34 pm, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:





bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus no welfare, so
coming into existence cannot improve an entity's welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock animals by breeding
them into existence; we do not do them any "favor". We facilitate
their existence, but that existence is not a gift or benefit to
them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be once they do
exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if, suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock animals into
existence. The fact that "billions of farm animals" would thereby
never exist would have no moral meaning to any animals. There would
not be any lack of consideration shown.

If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have no business to
worry
about what other people do or think.

of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the existence of
them in future. in particular, existence being bred for meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.

You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.

just a period of pain on earth.

But necessary to be enlightened.

the unborn don't give a flying ****.


for the birds?

^~

i'm a good aim with a rifle and
i shot a bird on my best friends
farm one day, glad i did it. i
see how superficial the joy i
was having was compared to the
life i took, or just winged it?
there was no joy anymore for me.

On Jun 30, 5:51*pm, bundling snowfalls wrote:
On 1/07/2010 5:39 AM, zenworm wrote:





On Jun 30, 2:34 pm, bundling *wrote:
On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:

bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus no welfare, so
coming into existence cannot improve an entity's welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock animals by breeding
them into existence; we do not do them any "favor". *We facilitate
their existence, but that existence is not a gift or benefit to
them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be once they do
exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if, suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock animals into
existence. *The fact that "billions of farm animals" would thereby
never exist would have no moral meaning to any animals. *There would
not be any lack of consideration shown.

If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have no business to
worry
about what other people do or think.

of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the existence of
them in future. in particular, existence being bred for meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.

You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.

just a period of pain on earth.

But necessary to be enlightened.

the unborn don't give a flying ****.

for the birds?

^~

i'm a good aim with a rifle and
i shot a bird on my best friends
farm one day, glad i did it. i
see how superficial the joy i
was having was compared to the
life i took, or just winged it?
there was no joy anymore for me.


Perhaps all 'sin' can be summed up in one word:

"waste".

^~

On 1/07/2010 5:56 AM, zenworm wrote:
On Jun 30, 5:51 pm, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 5:39 AM, zenworm wrote:





On Jun 30, 2:34 pm, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:

bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus no welfare, so
coming into existence cannot improve an entity's welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock animals by breeding
them into existence; we do not do them any "favor". We facilitate
their existence, but that existence is not a gift or benefit to
them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be once they do
exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if, suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock animals into
existence. The fact that "billions of farm animals" would thereby
never exist would have no moral meaning to any animals. There would
not be any lack of consideration shown.

If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have no business to
worry
about what other people do or think.

of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the existence of
them in future. in particular, existence being bred for meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.

You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.

just a period of pain on earth.

But necessary to be enlightened.

the unborn don't give a flying ****.

for the birds?

^~

i'm a good aim with a rifle and
i shot a bird on my best friends
farm one day, glad i did it. i
see how superficial the joy i
was having was compared to the
life i took, or just winged it?
there was no joy anymore for me.


Perhaps all 'sin' can be summed up in one word:

"waste".

^~

yes. there are better things to do
than being shot or eaten i'm sure.

On 1/07/2010 6:00 AM, bundling snowfalls wrote:
On 1/07/2010 5:56 AM, zenworm wrote:
On Jun 30, 5:51 pm, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 5:39 AM, zenworm wrote:





On Jun 30, 2:34 pm, bundling wrote:
On 1/07/2010 2:29 AM, oxtail wrote:

bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 2:04 AM, oxtail wrote:
bundling snowfalls wrote:

On 1/07/2010 1:56 AM, oxtail wrote:
Fred C. Dobbs wrote:

A benefit is something that improves the welfare of an entity.
Prior to its existence, there is no entity and thus no
welfare, so
coming into existence cannot improve an entity's welfare.

We do not "give the gift of life" to livestock animals by
breeding
them into existence; we do not do them any "favor". We
facilitate
their existence, but that existence is not a gift or benefit to
them. No matter how pleasant their lives might be once they do
exist, existence itself is not a benefit to them.

No harm would be inflicted on any animals if, suddenly and for
whatever reason, we were to stop breeding livestock animals into
existence. The fact that "billions of farm animals" would
thereby
never exist would have no moral meaning to any animals. There
would
not be any lack of consideration shown.

If you are not smart enough
to be concerned about the welfare
of sentient beings to be born in the future, you have no
business to
worry
about what other people do or think.

of course the welfare matters you idiot. it's about the
existence of
them in future. in particular, existence being bred for meat.

grow up you guys, that's about enough.

You are not getting it.
This is about how to think well
and whether life is sacred.

just a period of pain on earth.

But necessary to be enlightened.

the unborn don't give a flying ****.

for the birds?

^~

i'm a good aim with a rifle and
i shot a bird on my best friends
farm one day, glad i did it. i
see how superficial the joy i
was having was compared to the
life i took, or just winged it?
there was no joy anymore for me.


Perhaps all 'sin' can be summed up in one word:

"waste".

^~

yes. there are better things to do
than being shot or eaten i'm sure.

if you were a bird.