for the love of love, stop with the bickering, please

[Guest guest]

Keith has made some interresting points about animal byproducts being

almost everywhere. My feeling is that just because use of a product

I may consider unethical is unavoidable is no reason for me to use it

without restriction. Oil for instance is bad for the environment....

something bad for the environment is likely to kill some person or

animal at some point, even if they aren't born yet. can you live

completely free of oil use in a " first world " country? Probably

not. So let's all drive SUV's and buy stock in Exxon! i'm being

fascious, but seriously, i think the right thing to do is limit my

use of oil as much as possible. So when I find out a company like

Motorola sells detonation devices to a country which uses them for

their land mines, I ask myself, Does Motorola sell any products i

really need? If yes, is there an alternative company i could buy

them from? while i cannot possibly boycott every company that ever

produced an explosive, i *might* be able to at least limit my

consumption of companies who sell them for military or terrorist

purposes. i don't need a cell phone, so it's easy for me to boycott

that company. You can call that prejudice, i don't see it that way.

I am not condemning everyone who ever purchased motorola knowing

about their selling of detonation devices to cambodia.

 

If a company or a restaurant sells a meat product and a meat-less

product, do i boycott the whole company? No. I assume that by buying

only the meatless product i am not supporting the meat industry. I

work at mc donald's, i don't eat meat. i don't see myself as

supporting the meat industry because customers would buy it whether

or not i worked there. but do i benefit from the sale of meat?

unfortunately, yes.

 

i just think we ought to let people make the distinctions they choose

to make. vegan fine. vegetarian fine. neither is a more ethical

choice if the person feels the choice is the most ethical one for

them. Calling someone a hypocrite, biased, impure, or a fascist

because they give up some harmful things and accept others may be or

because they have different opinions about whatever, may well-

warranted- to you. But at least ask yourself if you're calling them

names to justify your own behavior, to make yourself feel better, or

what. My advice to all- stop getting all defensive / offended every

time some one doesn't do something you do because they feel it's

wrong. or because they simply disagree.

 

Obviously there's certain actions in western society that people tend

to say are always unethical (i.e. rape). no one here, would say it's

ok to rape, once and a while. why? because the vast majority of us

are not rapists and we're taught rape is unethical. someone who

tries to abstain from animal products, whether or not they are

ethical is a matter of opinion. they're in the minority. is this

difference fair? I honestly don't know.

 

there are some very intelligent / compassionate people in this

group. but looking at the posts lately, all i read is bickering and

name-calling and total intolerance and lack of respect for each

other. Again i'm being fascious but, NO wonder why more people

aren't vegetarian!!! we can't even get along with eachother or agree

on what a vegetarian is. And i am not at all innocent. i have let my

anger get the best of me whenever anyone contradicting my opinion.

all i'm saying is can't we have one friggin' debate without someone

getting hostile?

 

super dave

[Guest guest]

i dont know why your so angry and mean, dave4sale.

it's really sad though, that you can't try to get

along with everyone else a little more and stop being

so abusive.

 

 

har har har... i kill me.. sigh;)

 

lol,

-k-

 

 

--- " dave <dave4sale " <dave4sale

wrote:

> Keith has made some interresting points about animal

> byproducts being

> almost everywhere. My feeling is that just because

> use of a product

> I may consider unethical is unavoidable is no reason

> for me to use it

> without restriction. Oil for instance is bad for

> the environment....

> something bad for the environment is likely to kill

> some person or

> animal at some point, even if they aren't born yet.

> can you live

> completely free of oil use in a " first world "

> country? Probably

> not. So let's all drive SUV's and buy stock in

> Exxon! i'm being

> fascious, but seriously, i think the right thing to

> do is limit my

> use of oil as much as possible. So when I find out

> a company like

> Motorola sells detonation devices to a country which

> uses them for

> their land mines, I ask myself, Does Motorola sell

> any products i

> really need? If yes, is there an alternative

> company i could buy

> them from? while i cannot possibly boycott every

> company that ever

> produced an explosive, i *might* be able to at least

> limit my

> consumption of companies who sell them for military

> or terrorist

> purposes. i don't need a cell phone, so it's easy

> for me to boycott

> that company. You can call that prejudice, i don't

> see it that way.

> I am not condemning everyone who ever purchased

> motorola knowing

> about their selling of detonation devices to

> cambodia.

>

> If a company or a restaurant sells a meat product

> and a meat-less

> product, do i boycott the whole company? No. I

> assume that by buying

> only the meatless product i am not supporting the

> meat industry. I

> work at mc donald's, i don't eat meat. i don't see

> myself as

> supporting the meat industry because customers would

> buy it whether

> or not i worked there. but do i benefit from the

> sale of meat?

> unfortunately, yes.

>

> i just think we ought to let people make the

> distinctions they choose

> to make. vegan fine. vegetarian fine. neither is a

> more ethical

> choice if the person feels the choice is the most

> ethical one for

> them. Calling someone a hypocrite, biased, impure,

> or a fascist

> because they give up some harmful things and accept

> others may be or

> because they have different opinions about whatever,

> may well-

> warranted- to you. But at least ask yourself if

> you're calling them

> names to justify your own behavior, to make yourself

> feel better, or

> what. My advice to all- stop getting all defensive

> / offended every

> time some one doesn't do something you do because

> they feel it's

> wrong. or because they simply disagree.

>

> Obviously there's certain actions in western society

> that people tend

> to say are always unethical (i.e. rape). no one

> here, would say it's

> ok to rape, once and a while. why? because the

> vast majority of us

> are not rapists and we're taught rape is unethical.

> someone who

> tries to abstain from animal products, whether or

> not they are

> ethical is a matter of opinion. they're in the

> minority. is this

> difference fair? I honestly don't know.

>

> there are some very intelligent / compassionate

> people in this

> group. but looking at the posts lately, all i read

> is bickering and

> name-calling and total intolerance and lack of

> respect for each

> other. Again i'm being fascious but, NO wonder why

> more people

> aren't vegetarian!!! we can't even get along with

> eachother or agree

> on what a vegetarian is. And i am not at all

> innocent. i have let my

> anger get the best of me whenever anyone

> contradicting my opinion.

> all i'm saying is can't we have one friggin' debate

> without someone

> getting hostile?

>

> super dave

>

>

 

 

=====

 

Where is this beauty?

 

I search and search and then find,

 

We are the lotus.

 

 

 

Om Mani Padme Hum

 

 

 

 

Send Flowers for Valentine's Day

 

[Guest guest]

" dave <dave4sale> " <dave4sale> wrote:

> NO wonder why more people

> aren't vegetarian!!! we can't even get along with eachother or agree

> on what a vegetarian is.

 

Why do I have to agree with or get along with other vegetarians just to

*be* one? I stopped eating meat for health reasons. It had nothing to

do with anyone else who chooses not to eat meat. Its about *me*, not

anyone else, at least in my little world. I simply don't follow this

logic, if there is any involved.

 

--

Sherri

 

" Sex is not the answer. Sex is the question. " Yes " is the answer. " -

Swami X

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

This kind of reminds me of something I saw on access tv awhile back. This

woman was in a barn showing various animals and speaking of animal rights

and such. So I became interested and decided not to make another round on

the remote. She began to inform the viewers how the animals were abused in

factories while showing some of their pets in their animal friendly barn,

but in such a bitter/radical/hatred tone. I was immediately turned off by

it and changed the channel. I wondered how many others she had lost for the

effort because of her manner (or perhaps gained who knows). It's not what

we say but how we say it. Shoot, if she would have been a little more

" civil " then maybe I would have volunteered, but I did not want to be amidst

the environment of that person I saw on the picture box. I understand her

passion, but geesh " hold 'er together before she blows " **scottish accent**

or something like that.

 

There is my hot air,

Shawn

 

 

 

" I did absolutely nothing, and it was everything that I hoped it could be. "

Peter Gibbons - Office Space

 

" It's not that I'm lazy, it's that I just don't care. "

Peter Gibbons - Office Space

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

----Original Message Follows----

" dave <dave4sale " <dave4sale

 

 

for the love of love, stop with the bickering,

please

Fri, 14 Feb 2003 00:49:28 -0000

 

Keith has made some interresting points about animal byproducts being

almost everywhere. My feeling is that just because use of a product

I may consider unethical is unavoidable is no reason for me to use it

without restriction. Oil for instance is bad for the environment....

something bad for the environment is likely to kill some person or

animal at some point, even if they aren't born yet. can you live

completely free of oil use in a " first world " country? Probably

not. So let's all drive SUV's and buy stock in Exxon! i'm being

fascious, but seriously, i think the right thing to do is limit my

use of oil as much as possible. So when I find out a company like

Motorola sells detonation devices to a country which uses them for

their land mines, I ask myself, Does Motorola sell any products i

really need? If yes, is there an alternative company i could buy

them from? while i cannot possibly boycott every company that ever

produced an explosive, i *might* be able to at least limit my

consumption of companies who sell them for military or terrorist

purposes. i don't need a cell phone, so it's easy for me to boycott

that company. You can call that prejudice, i don't see it that way.

I am not condemning everyone who ever purchased motorola knowing

about their selling of detonation devices to cambodia.

 

If a company or a restaurant sells a meat product and a meat-less

product, do i boycott the whole company? No. I assume that by buying

only the meatless product i am not supporting the meat industry. I

work at mc donald's, i don't eat meat. i don't see myself as

supporting the meat industry because customers would buy it whether

or not i worked there. but do i benefit from the sale of meat?

unfortunately, yes.

 

i just think we ought to let people make the distinctions they choose

to make. vegan fine. vegetarian fine. neither is a more ethical

choice if the person feels the choice is the most ethical one for

them. Calling someone a hypocrite, biased, impure, or a fascist

because they give up some harmful things and accept others may be or

because they have different opinions about whatever, may well-

warranted- to you. But at least ask yourself if you're calling them

names to justify your own behavior, to make yourself feel better, or

what. My advice to all- stop getting all defensive / offended every

time some one doesn't do something you do because they feel it's

wrong. or because they simply disagree.

 

Obviously there's certain actions in western society that people tend

to say are always unethical (i.e. rape). no one here, would say it's

ok to rape, once and a while. why? because the vast majority of us

are not rapists and we're taught rape is unethical. someone who

tries to abstain from animal products, whether or not they are

ethical is a matter of opinion. they're in the minority. is this

difference fair? I honestly don't know.

 

there are some very intelligent / compassionate people in this

group. but looking at the posts lately, all i read is bickering and

name-calling and total intolerance and lack of respect for each

other. Again i'm being fascious but, NO wonder why more people

aren't vegetarian!!! we can't even get along with eachother or agree

on what a vegetarian is. And i am not at all innocent. i have let my

anger get the best of me whenever anyone contradicting my opinion.

all i'm saying is can't we have one friggin' debate without someone

getting hostile?

 

super dave

 

 

 

_______________

MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.

http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

[Guest guest]

i'm afraid i don't getcha partner, why u would equate my post

with a bitter/radical/ hatred tone, since part of my post was asking

if we could avoid the letting our arguments get so vicious /

disrespectful. obviously u can't read my feelings from the printed

words, but i integrated some humour in it to keep it light. granted

my humour tends to be cynical sarcastic and i am a radical. or did

you not read all of it?

 

 

, " _- MatrixenO -_ "

<matrixeno@h...> wrote:

> This kind of reminds me of something I saw on access tv awhile

back. This

> woman was in a barn showing various animals and speaking of animal

rights

> and such. So I became interested and decided not to make another

round on

> the remote. She began to inform the viewers how the animals were

abused in

> factories while showing some of their pets in their animal friendly

barn,

> but in such a bitter/radical/hatred tone. I was immediately turned

off by

> it and changed the channel. I wondered how many others she had

lost for the

> effort because of her manner (or perhaps gained who knows). It's

not what

> we say but how we say it. Shoot, if she would have been a little

more

> " civil " then maybe I would have volunteered, but I did not want to

be amidst

> the environment of that person I saw on the picture box. I

understand her

> passion, but geesh " hold 'er together before she blows " **scottish

accent**

> or something like that.

>

> There is my hot air,

> Shawn

>

>

>

> " I did absolutely nothing, and it was everything that I hoped it

could be. "

> Peter Gibbons - Office Space

>

> " It's not that I'm lazy, it's that I just don't care. "

> Peter Gibbons - Office Space

>

----Original Message Follows----

> " dave <dave4sale> " <dave4sale>

>

>

> for the love of love, stop with the

bickering,

> please

> Fri, 14 Feb 2003 00:49:28 -0000

>

> Keith has made some interresting points about animal byproducts

being

> almost everywhere. My feeling is that just because use of a product

> I may consider unethical is unavoidable is no reason for me to use

it

> without restriction. Oil for instance is bad for the

environment....

> something bad for the environment is likely to kill some person or

> animal at some point, even if they aren't born yet. can you live

> completely free of oil use in a " first world " country? Probably

> not. So let's all drive SUV's and buy stock in Exxon! i'm being

> fascious, but seriously, i think the right thing to do is limit my

> use of oil as much as possible. So when I find out a company like

> Motorola sells detonation devices to a country which uses them for

> their land mines, I ask myself, Does Motorola sell any products i

> really need? If yes, is there an alternative company i could buy

> them from? while i cannot possibly boycott every company that ever

> produced an explosive, i *might* be able to at least limit my

> consumption of companies who sell them for military or terrorist

> purposes. i don't need a cell phone, so it's easy for me to boycott

> that company. You can call that prejudice, i don't see it that way.

> I am not condemning everyone who ever purchased motorola knowing

> about their selling of detonation devices to cambodia.

>

> If a company or a restaurant sells a meat product and a meat-less

> product, do i boycott the whole company? No. I assume that by

buying

> only the meatless product i am not supporting the meat industry. I

> work at mc donald's, i don't eat meat. i don't see myself as

> supporting the meat industry because customers would buy it whether

> or not i worked there. but do i benefit from the sale of meat?

> unfortunately, yes.

>

> i just think we ought to let people make the distinctions they

choose

> to make. vegan fine. vegetarian fine. neither is a more ethical

> choice if the person feels the choice is the most ethical one for

> them. Calling someone a hypocrite, biased, impure, or a fascist

> because they give up some harmful things and accept others may be or

> because they have different opinions about whatever, may well-

> warranted- to you. But at least ask yourself if you're calling them

> names to justify your own behavior, to make yourself feel better, or

> what. My advice to all- stop getting all defensive / offended every

> time some one doesn't do something you do because they feel it's

> wrong. or because they simply disagree.

>

> Obviously there's certain actions in western society that people

tend

> to say are always unethical (i.e. rape). no one here, would say it's

> ok to rape, once and a while. why? because the vast majority of us

> are not rapists and we're taught rape is unethical. someone who

> tries to abstain from animal products, whether or not they are

> ethical is a matter of opinion. they're in the minority. is this

> difference fair? I honestly don't know.

>

> there are some very intelligent / compassionate people in this

> group. but looking at the posts lately, all i read is bickering and

> name-calling and total intolerance and lack of respect for each

> other. Again i'm being fascious but, NO wonder why more people

> aren't vegetarian!!! we can't even get along with eachother or agree

> on what a vegetarian is. And i am not at all innocent. i have let

my

> anger get the best of me whenever anyone contradicting my opinion.

> all i'm saying is can't we have one friggin' debate without someone

> getting hostile?

>

> super dave

>

>

>

> _______________

> MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.

> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

[Guest guest]

dude,

 

your addressing the same person who read a portion of

my post, saw the word facist, and decided to make sure

everyone got their commentary on it, without them

having access to the full transcript or context, but

fully content to pass judgement...

 

define irony...

 

....being scolded for using the term facist by someone

who decides they can dogmatically pass judgement on

you without attempting to obtain a compete picture of

what you are discussing.

 

hahaha

K

--- " dave <dave4sale " <dave4sale

wrote:

> i'm afraid i don't getcha partner, why u would

> equate my post

> with a bitter/radical/ hatred tone, since part of my

> post was asking

> if we could avoid the letting our arguments get so

> vicious /

> disrespectful. obviously u can't read my feelings

> from the printed

> words, but i integrated some humour in it to keep it

> light. granted

> my humour tends to be cynical sarcastic and i am a

> radical. or did

> you not read all of it?

>

>

> , " _-

> MatrixenO -_ "

> <matrixeno@h...> wrote:

> > This kind of reminds me of something I saw on

> access tv awhile

> back.

 

=====

 

Where is this beauty?

 

I search and search and then find,

 

We are the lotus.

 

 

 

Om Mani Padme Hum

 

 

 

 

Send Flowers for Valentine's Day