Re: Some Hard Truths for Ethical Vegetarians

"Ray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Ray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > "Derek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > "Ray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > >
> > > > > Haven't you got any vivisectionists to defend, or
> > > > > anyone to blackmail, Slater?
> > > >
> > > > No I',m trying to find the logic in you posting Nash.
> > > > There is none! What the hell is the matter with you?
> > >
> > > I'm doing what I do best; attacking those who support
> > > vivisection. And, as you've found to your own cost, I
> > > also attack those who try to claim such supporters are
> > > ARA's. Zakhar and Larry have both fucked your arse
> > > good-n-proper this time.
> >
> Zakhar, Larry, me, and now Michael, according to
> you we are *all* hypocrites, steady on, you are
> running out of people. Is there anyone on these NGs
> who is genuine?
>
Let's take each in turn.

Zakhar claims to be in support for animal rights
and against the use of animals for research in labs,
but this pose is a lie and is easily shown by his own
comments;

    "for example if one rabbit would save 1000
    humans, then I could accept that the rabbit
    should die."
    Zakhar  2003-02-02

And

    "The real life case of a 19 year old with vCJD
    being experimented on without his consent, is
    a form of vivisection. Most of us can accept
    that it was the right thing to do, in this sad case.
    We can take the same decision making process,
    independent of species."
    Zakhar  2003-09-28

>From that, as well as his other example, he has
unwittingly shown that he does support vivisection.
He believes that "most of us can accept that it's the
right thing to do", and that "we can take the same
decision making process, independent of species."

And

    "There can be cases for animal experimentation
    as there can be for human experiments. It would
    make sense to test a new antibiotic for guinea
    pigs on guinea pigs rather than humans, don't
    you think?"
    Zakhar  2003-02-17

Larry is just as big a liar as Zakhar, and this can
be easily shown by his comment;

    "I support using animals for experimentation but
    a committee should oversee such endeavors to
    make sure the minimal harm is done for the
    maximal good."
    Larry 2003-10-27

You support and defend Zakhar by proclaiming
him to be "valuable defender of all animal rights
issues" in spite of the evidence against him, and
this fucks you because you've now set yourself
up as a defender of those who support vivisection.

Now lets look at Cerkowski's claims on animal
rights and position it alongside his other claim
where he insists he and we are all responsible for
the collateral deaths caused by farmers. If he truly
believes he is responsible for and causal to these
deaths, why does he continue to cause them? He
certainly wouldn't continue harming members of
his own family in the same way, so the only two
answers available for his continued intentional
harms to animals are;

1) he doesn't hold a belief that animals have any
    rights against his continued cruelty toward them.
or
2) he doesn't honestly believe he is responsible for
    and causal to their deaths.

Either way, Michael Cerkowski is a liar and has
no grounds to insist other ARAs must accept his
philosophy on accepting the blame for animal
cruelty while it's clearly obvious that his stated
beliefs on animal rights and moral responsibility
are false.