Man is the master of animals, we can kill them at will.

I often visit www.factoryfarming.com, where again and again, I am
reminded of my superiority over farm animals. They are bound to
miserable existence and ghoulish death, whereas I am enjoying their
tissues and an enriched environment and great lifestyle. When I devour
nice pale veal, I feel, gee, I must be a very important person if a
veal has to suffer like in a tiny cage, for my eating pleasure.

Professor

On 20 Jan 2004 19:31:07 GMT, professor@warehouse.ws (Professor) wrote:

Man is the master of animals, we can kill them at will.

I often visit www.factoryfarming.com, where again and again, I am
reminded of my superiority over farm animals. They are bound to
miserable existence and ghoulish death, whereas I am enjoying their
tissues and an enriched environment and great lifestyle. When I devour
nice pale veal, I feel, gee, I must be a very important person if a
veal has to suffer like in a tiny cage, for my eating pleasure.

Professor

The animal rights groups will say that the animal kingdom is getting even
with
us for mistreating them. Cows give milk and CJD. Civets give perfume and
SARS.
Horses give HRT and cancer.

Ora

Man is the master of animals, we can kill them at will.

I often visit www.factoryfarming.com, where again and again, I am
reminded of my superiority over farm animals. They are bound to
miserable existence and ghoulish death,

whereas I am enjoying their
tissues and an enriched environment and great lifestyle. When I devour
nice pale veal, I feel, gee, I must be a very important person if a
veal has to suffer like in a tiny cage, for my eating pleasure.

Professor

Man is the master of animals, we can kill them at will.

I often visit www.factoryfarming.com, where again and again, I am
reminded of my superiority over farm animals. They are bound to
miserable existence and ghoulish death, whereas I am enjoying their
tissues and an enriched environment and great lifestyle. When I devour
nice pale veal, I feel, gee, I must be a very important person if a
veal has to suffer like in a tiny cage, for my eating pleasure.

Professor

taurusrc@aol.com> wrote in message
news:g4gr00tlf83q0944geqgu6qo06hqq0sl7u@4ax.com...
On 20 Jan 2004 19:31:07 GMT, professor@warehouse.ws (Professor) wrote:

Man is the master of animals, we can kill them at will.

I often visit www.factoryfarming.com, where again and again, I am
reminded of my superiority over farm animals. They are bound to
miserable existence and ghoulish death, whereas I am enjoying their
tissues and an enriched environment and great lifestyle. When I devour
nice pale veal, I feel, gee, I must be a very important person if a
veal has to suffer like in a tiny cage, for my eating pleasure.

Professor

The animal rights groups will say that the animal kingdom is getting even
with
us for mistreating them. Cows give milk and CJD. Civets give perfume and
SARS.
Horses give HRT and cancer.

Ora

Or you could just say: *spot the troll*...

M.

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 01:18:48 -0000,
"Mark D." <M@rk.D_is_now@home.com> wrote:
taurusrc@aol.com> wrote in message
news:g4gr00tlf83q0944geqgu6qo06hqq0sl7u@4ax.com...
On 20 Jan 2004 19:31:07 GMT, professor@warehouse.ws (Professor) wrote:

Man is the master of animals, we can kill them at will.

I often visit www.factoryfarming.com, where again and again, I am
reminded of my superiority over farm animals. They are bound to
miserable existence and ghoulish death, whereas I am enjoying their
tissues and an enriched environment and great lifestyle. When I devour
nice pale veal, I feel, gee, I must be a very important person if a
veal has to suffer like in a tiny cage, for my eating pleasure.

The animal rights groups will say that the animal kingdom is getting even with
us for mistreating them. Cows give milk and CJD. Civets give perfume and SARS.
Horses give HRT and cancer.

Or you could just say: *spot the troll*...

I've never eaten spotted troll before. Is it anything like spotted
owl?

In article <kn2s001bs5ebbpirjptjgmmp8p315ho0rq@4ax.com>,
Bob Ward <bobward@email.com> wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 01:18:48 -0000,
"Mark D." <M@rk.D_is_now@home.com> wrote:
taurusrc@aol.com> wrote in message
news:g4gr00tlf83q0944geqgu6qo06hqq0sl7u@4ax.com...
On 20 Jan 2004 19:31:07 GMT, professor@warehouse.ws (Professor) wrote:

Man is the master of animals, we can kill them at will.

I often visit www.factoryfarming.com, where again and again, I am
reminded of my superiority over farm animals. They are bound to
miserable existence and ghoulish death, whereas I am enjoying their
tissues and an enriched environment and great lifestyle. When I
devour
nice pale veal, I feel, gee, I must be a very important person if a
veal has to suffer like in a tiny cage, for my eating pleasure.

The animal rights groups will say that the animal kingdom is getting
even with
us for mistreating them. Cows give milk and CJD. Civets give perfume
and SARS.
Horses give HRT and cancer.

Or you could just say: *spot the troll*...

I've never eaten spotted troll before. Is it anything like spotted
owl?

Nah. It's more like platypus, with a touch of that gum tree tang you
get with koala.

best stewed in their own juice

On 20 Jan 2004 19:31:07 GMT, professor@warehouse.ws (Professor) wrote:


Man is the master of animals, we can kill them at will.

I often visit www.factoryfarming.com, where again and again, I am
reminded of my superiority over farm animals. They are bound to
miserable existence and ghoulish death,


Some of them have decent lives and some don't.

whereas I am enjoying their
tissues and an enriched environment and great lifestyle. When I devour
nice pale veal, I feel, gee, I must be a very important person if a
veal has to suffer like in a tiny cage, for my eating pleasure.

Professor


You are incredibly lucky, or blessed, to be in the position
you're in. That doesn't mean the lives of beings in less fortunate
positions should not be given positive consideration, as you
"ARAs" want people to believe.

You want people to believe
that none of their lives are worth living.

Man is the master of animals, we can kill them at will.

I often visit www.factoryfarming.com, where again and again, I am
reminded of my superiority over farm animals. They are bound to
miserable existence and ghoulish death, whereas I am enjoying their
tissues and an enriched environment and great lifestyle. When I devour
nice pale veal, I feel, gee, I must be a very important person if a
veal has to suffer like in a tiny cage, for my eating pleasure.

Professor

OK you idiot. I'll bite into this game.

I can kill others, but that doesn't mean I am better or that I should eat
them. So I don't kill.

"Can" and "Should" are 2 different - ahem -
animals.

Jeffrey Dahmer bought into your theory and it seems he was wrong to assume
"can" equals "should".

"Professor" <professor@warehouse.ws> wrote in message
news:bujvlr$3f4$1@pita.alt.net...

Man is the master of animals, we can kill them at will.

I often visit www.factoryfarming.com, where again and again, I am
reminded of my superiority over farm animals. They are bound to
miserable existence and ghoulish death, whereas I am enjoying their
tissues and an enriched environment and great lifestyle. When I devour
nice pale veal, I feel, gee, I must be a very important person if a
veal has to suffer like in a tiny cage, for my eating pleasure.

Professor

. I await your ignorant banter about Nazis, too, even though they
passed the most stringent animal rights laws in history (at least to
that point in time).

snip
. I await your ignorant banter about Nazis, too, even though they
passed the most stringent animal rights laws in history (at least to
that point in time).

Absolutely false. The Nazi government did not pass any "animal
rights" laws at all, or carry out any of the basic goals of
animal _rights_.

You want to do this dance again, Usual?

You're just plain wrong on this one.

Rat wrote:

Absolutely false. The Nazi government did not pass any "animal
rights" laws at all, or carry out any of the basic goals of
animal _rights_.

You call those laws "animal welfare" laws which have nothing to do with
post-1970s AR.

It's a distinction without a difference despite your
sophistry that "post-1970s AR did not exist in the 1920s and 1930s so it
isn't really AR but maybe AW."

What is the difference between "the right which animals inherently
possess to be protected in and of themselves," laws "that explicitly
affirmed the moral status of animals independent of any human interest,"
and whatever you now claim is "post-1970s AR"? Distinctions without ANY
difference.

You want to do this dance again, Usual?

The question is, Do you? I recall you refused to Google your past
refutations.

snip

Absolutely false. The Nazi government did not pass any "animal
rights" laws at all, or carry out any of the basic goals of
animal _rights_.

You call those laws "animal welfare" laws which have nothing to do
with post-1970s AR.

Absolutely true. They were.

It's a distinction without a difference despite your sophistry that
"post-1970s AR did not exist in the 1920s and 1930s so it isn't really
AR but maybe AW."

There was a huge difference.

Any pro-AR government/movement would have
worked to eliminate use of animals in medicine, as food, as fur, as
leather.

The Nazi government encouraged all of those uses, and even
built a new, large facility which specifically BRED animals for
lab use. The Nazi government encouraged hunting (under Goering, who
was a hunter) encouraged farming (under Darre, who was a pig breeder),
encouraged looking on both humans and domestic animals as breeding
stock with no independent worth as individuals (under Himmler, the
chicken farmer). Sure, like the hunting organizations and the pet
breeders, they supported animal welfare for their human and animal
slaves, and encouraged elimination of human and animal "vermin" (as do
farmers). That didn't make them pro-AR.

They opposed vivisection and Jewish ritual slaughter for reasons that
had nothing to do with the motives of AR supporters --

they saw
vivisection and Kosher slaughter as Jewish, and part of a fragmenting
movement of "Jewish" and "Marxist" science which was attempting to
destroy the holistic and non-materialistic view of the world based in
the Nazis' Romantic ideological roots. There was NO philosophical
connection between modern AR and any Nazi philosophy or actions.

To claim otherwise is deliberate and dishonest sophistry.

snip

What is the difference between "the right which animals inherently
possess to be protected in and of themselves," laws "that explicitly
affirmed the moral status of animals independent of any human
interest," and whatever you now claim is "post-1970s AR"? Distinctions
without ANY difference.

The Nazi language is the same sort used by any of the modern animal
welfare organizations. It is not AR language, or an AR view in itself.

You want to do this dance again, Usual?

The question is, Do you? I recall you refused to Google your past
refutations.

I can give them in detail again if you want, but any competent
websearch would find them.