Re: Moral corruption - the blight of "animal 'rights' activists"

"Ipse dixit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:33:21 GMT, Bill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Rat & Swan wrote:
> >> Bill wrote:
> >>> Rat & Swan wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>>   I said that there would be no need to kill them if the caretakers
> >>>>>>   of the grain used appropriate alternate methods.
> >>
> >>>>> They use appropriate methods.
> >>
> >>>>  I said killing the rodents is not an appropriate method.
> >>
> >>> You lied.  You do think it's an appropriate method:
> >>> that's why you buy from those who employ that method.
> >>>
> >>>>>You approve of them:
> >>
> >>>>   I said I didn't.
> >>
> >>> You lied.  You do approve:  you buy from those who use the method.
> >>
> >> And once again, Jonnie/Bill refuses to address what his opponents
> >> really believe by claiming to know what they believe better than
> >> they do themselves.
> >
> >No.  That's not it, and you know it.
>
> You just did it again.
> >
> >You claim to believe something, and I show that your
> >behavior indicates you don't believe it.  No mind
> >reading required.
> >
> >You claim you don't approve of killing animals at grain
> >elevators, but you prove that you DO approve of it, by
> >buying grain products in the full knowledge of the
> >extermination of rodents at grain elevators.
>
> That line of reasoning is absurd for the simple reason
> that no one is said to approve of the deaths of humans
> in industry simply because they continue to buy products
> from that industry.

There are no industries which support sanctioned, systematic, deliberate,
and controlled killing of humans.

There's an example a failed analogy for you.

> >We don't
> >listen to your insincere words of what you believe
>
> We don't listen to your sloppy thinking on blame and
> moral responsibility, either.

You don't listen at all.