General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

usual suspect and rick etter

Started by Soapless · · Last activity · 90 posts · 2,280 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
8 May 2004
Last activity
7 June 2004
Original author
Soapless
Posts
90
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
2,280
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 90
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. These two like to tag team their harrassment.

    It takes two to get up to no good, quite often, so you
    can see why.

    However, verbal intercourse is a rather intimate affair when
    done properly.

    So it would not surprise me to find they share even more
    intimacies.

    Leaving out "significant others" for decency's sake,
    it would seem they share a very passionate hatred for
    raw veagns, and are agrreed that intolerance is a sure
    bet anywhere.

    I just wish they'd stop trying to sound older than they are,
    but it may be too late. Spiritual rebirth is a notion i
    can't wait for them to scoff at. The Human brain matures at
    about 33 years of age. but, that's another arguement....

  2. (soapless) said:

    These two like to tag team their harrassment.

    It takes two to get up to no good,

    Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to fewer
    animal deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they don't really
    care about human influence on animals. They only care
    about promoting veg*nism regardless of its impact on
    animals. What causes great mental anguish to the veg*ns
    is that they don't want to admit even to themselves that
    they could be mistaken, again regardless--**completely
    regardless!!**--of their impact on animals.

  3. "soapless" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    These two like to tag team their harrassment.

    It takes two to get up to no good, quite often, so you can
    see why.

    However, verbal intercourse is a rather intimate affair
    when done properly.


    ==================
    And it' s obvious you've never had any, of either kind....

    Quoted message said:


    So it would not surprise me to find they share even more
    intimacies.

    Leaving out "significant others" for decency's sake, it
    would seem they share a very passionate hatred for raw
    veagns, and are agrreed that intolerance is a sure bet
    anywhere.


    ================
    Really? I suggest you read vegans with a little more
    comprehension. They, and you, are the ones spewing the hate.
    It's a part of your vegan religion...

    Quoted message said:


    I just wish they'd stop trying to sound older than they
    are, but it may be too late. Spiritual rebirth is a notion
    i can't wait for them to scoff at. The Human brain matures
    at about 33 years of age. but, that's another
    arguement....


    ======================
    Then maybe there is hope for you, someday, eh stupid?

  4. [email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    On 19 Apr 2004 04:24:42 -0700, [email hidden]

    (soapless) said:

    These two like to tag team their harrassment.

    It takes two to get up to no good,

    Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to fewer
    animal deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they don't
    really care about human influence on animals. They
    only care about promoting veg*nism regardless of its
    impact on animals. What causes great mental anguish to
    the veg*ns is that they don't want to admit even to
    themselves that they could be mistaken, again regardless--
    **completely regardless!!**--of their impact on
    animals.

    Please quote where etter "points out how veg*ns could
    contribute to fewer animal deaths."

    All he does is babble.

  5. nope -they name-call, a sure sign of unmanageable anger.

    Frugality, not any diet terminology is what saves lives.

  6. (soapless) said:

    nope -they name-call, a sure sign of unmanageable anger.

    We can agree that the name calling isn't likely to help
    anything, and might possibly make things worse. But
    maybe it doesn't make any difference how he points
    things out. From my experience in these ngs veg*ns will
    always try to oppose the suggestion that people
    consider any other type of diet, even when it involves
    fewer animal deaths than veg*nism.

    Quoted message said:

    Frugality, not any diet terminology is what saves lives.

    · From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
    steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life,
    people get over 500 pounds of human consumable
    meat...that's well over 500 servings of meat. From a grass
    raised dairy cow people get thousands of dairy servings.
    Due to the influence of farm machinery, and *icides, and
    in the case of rice the flooding and draining of fields,
    one meal of soy or rice based product is likely to involve
    more animal deaths than hundreds of meals derived from
    grass raised cattle. Grass raised cattle products
    contribute to less wildlife deaths, better wildlife
    habitat, and better lives for cattle than soy or rice
    products. ·

  7. (Ron) said:

    [email hidden] wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    On 19 Apr 2004 04:24:42 -0700, [email hidden]

    (soapless) said:

    These two like to tag team their harrassment.

    It takes two to get up to no good,

    Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to fewer
    animal deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they don't
    really care about human influence on animals. They
    only care about promoting veg*nism regardless of its
    impact on animals. What causes great mental anguish
    to the veg*ns is that they don't want to admit even
    to themselves that they could be mistaken, again regardless--
    **completely regardless!!**--of their impact on
    animals.

    Please quote where etter "points out how veg*ns could
    contribute to fewer animal deaths."

    All he does is babble.

    He does have a good point, but the presentation triggers
    resentment. Regardless of how it's pointed out though,
    I've come to believe veg*ns will always try to promote
    the idea that veg*nism is the most ethical option even
    when it causes more deaths than eating meat. That fact
    causes a strong feeling of disgust in me, and it would
    appear that it does so in Etter as well. That being the
    case, it doesn't matter how he points it out, does it?
    If not, I guess he may as well go ahead and vent if
    that's how he wants to do it.

  8. "Ron" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    [email hidden] wrote in message


    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    On 19 Apr 2004 04:24:42 -0700, [email hidden]

    (soapless) said:

    These two like to tag team their harrassment.

    It takes two to get up to no good,

    Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to
    fewer animal deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they
    don't really care about human influence on animals.
    They only care about promoting veg*nism regardless
    of its impact on animals. What causes great mental
    anguish to the veg*ns is that they don't want to
    admit even to themselves that they could be
    mistaken, again regardless--**completely regardless!!**--
    of their impact on animals.

    Please quote where etter "points out how veg*ns could
    contribute to fewer animal deaths."


    ================
    Any number of posts, fool. try reading for comprehension,
    instead of hate...

    Quoted message said:


    All he does is babble.


    =================
    To your ignorant mindless stupidity, maybe. Sane people know
    that you are a desperate killer, looking for absolution...

  9. "soapless" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    nope -they name-call, a sure sign of unmanageable anger.


    ==================
    Nope. A sure sign that you have nothing to refute what we
    say.

    That's why you have to snip out everything somebody posts
    before you add your bit of stupidity.

    Quoted message said:


    Frugality, not any diet terminology is what saves lives.


    ==================
    Refute what I say. Or, defend the vegan simple rule for
    simple minds with real data.

    You can't do either, killer.

  10. That is precisely why i avoid those very "foods", not
    mentioning the protein overdose of "wrong strands "
    surf{protein folding}.

    let's address coffee and petroleum, you seem to know
    logistics.

    Personally, it was the disposable cups, not the having to
    tip the waitress, that turned me off. My van burned $75 cdn
    a day to be self employed as a tradesman. Now, i'll never
    drive again due to "my" pollution concerns. just so you
    know my "qualifications" to speak on the matter.

  11. Also, if it is a seed, bean, nut, sprout or any whole or
    potentially whole lifeform it is killing to eat it. This is
    not the case with my diet - but for the insenitivities of
    the farmer that "produces" them. A garden of tomates is a
    very symbiotic relationship if one craps there, as the seeds
    need that partial digestion of protein coat to sprout.

    Also, when i walk, i check more for ants than cars.

    Thou shalt not kill. Never mind if the cows step on ants, we
    have to learn to sit on our hands and myob not just byob.

  12. [email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    On 20 Apr 2004 11:19:54 -0700, [email hidden]

    (Ron) said:

    [email hidden] wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    On 19 Apr 2004 04:24:42 -0700, [email hidden]
    (soapless) wrote:

    >These two like to tag team their harrassment.
    >
    >It takes two to get up to no good,

    Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to
    fewer animal deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they
    don't really care about human influence on animals.
    They only care about promoting veg*nism regardless
    of its impact on animals. What causes great mental
    anguish to the veg*ns is that they don't want to
    admit even to themselves that they could be
    mistaken, again regardless--**completely regardless!!**--
    of their impact on animals.

    Please quote where etter "points out how veg*ns could
    contribute to fewer animal deaths."

    All he does is babble.

    He does have a good point, but the presentation
    triggers resentment. Regardless of how it's pointed
    out though, I've come to believe veg*ns will always
    try to promote the idea that veg*nism is the most
    ethical option even when it causes more deaths than
    eating meat. That fact causes a strong feeling of
    disgust in me, and it would appear that it does so in
    Etter as well. That being the case, it doesn't matter
    how he points it out, does it? If not, I guess he may
    as well go ahead and vent if that's how he wants to
    do it.

    Quit obfuscating and show the *QUOTE*!

    Jeez. Are you ~both~ retarded?

  13. rick etter said:


    "Ron" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    [email hidden] wrote in message


    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    On 19 Apr 2004 04:24:42 -0700, [email hidden]
    (soapless) wrote:

    >These two like to tag team their harrassment.
    >
    >It takes two to get up to no good,

    Etter points out how veg*ns could contribute to
    fewer animal deaths. Veg*ns hate it because they
    don't really care about human influence on animals.
    They only care about promoting veg*nism regardless
    of its impact on animals. What causes great mental
    anguish to the veg*ns is that they don't want to
    admit even to themselves that they could be
    mistaken, again regardless--**completely regardless!!**--
    of their impact on animals.

    Please quote where etter "points out how veg*ns could
    contribute to fewer animal deaths."


    ================
    Any number of posts, fool. try reading for comprehension,

    That would involve considering how he contributes to animal
    deaths
    like everybody else, and may be far beyond what he's willing
    to attempt.

    Quoted message said:

    instead of hate...

    It appears that his hatred is stronger than yours.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    All he does is babble.


    =================
    To your ignorant mindless stupidity, maybe. Sane people
    know that you are a desperate killer, looking for
    absolution...

    In order to look for absolution, wouldn't he first have
    to admit to his contribution to animal deaths? I believe
    he's more likely in a state of chronic denial, and will
    probably never be able to rise above it.

  14. Quoted message said:

    draining of fields, one meal of soy or rice based
    product is likely to involve more animal deaths than
    hundreds of meals

    so eat organic fruit and nuts

    John

  15. <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Regardless of how it's pointed out though, I've come to
    believe veg*ns will always try to promote the idea that
    veg*nism is the most ethical option ...


    Since you know I am a rational (not "ethical"😉 vegan,
    and I vigorously oppose the absurd, meaningless concept
    of "ethics" in dietary or lifestyle choice, you are
    caught in yet another lie.

    Quoted message said:

    ... even when it causes more deaths than eating meat.


    Could you please provide some credible references
    supporting this claim?? Of course not; you never can
    supply any support for your propaganda when challenged.

    Laurie

  16. "rick etter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    "Ron" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    All he does is babble.

    re> Sane people know that you are a desperate killer,
    re> looking for
    absolution... Thanks, rick, for proving Ron's point with
    more mindless babble.

    Laurie

  17. (soapless) said:

    Also, if it is a seed, bean, nut, sprout or any whole or
    potentially whole lifeform it is killing to eat it.

    I seriously doubt that vegetation has feelings or
    awareness, and ***definately!!!*** hope that they don't.
    If they do, the suffering caused by humans and other
    animals is absolutely incredible. Just mowing the lawn
    would be a horrible act.

    Quoted message said:

    This is not the case with my diet - but for the
    insenitivities of the farmer that "produces" them. A garden
    of tomates is a very symbiotic relationship if one craps
    there, as the seeds need that partial digestion of protein
    coat to sprout.

    If plants have feelings then you contribute to
    incredible horrors regardless of which types you
    consume.

    Quoted message said:

    Also, when i walk, i check more for ants than cars.

    Thou shalt not kill.

    Deuteronomy 12 15 Nevertheless, you may slaughter your
    animals in any of your towns and eat as much of the meat as
    you want, as if it were gazelle or deer, according to the
    blessing the LORD your God gives you. Both the ceremonially
    unclean and the clean may eat it.

    Deuteronomy 14 4 These are the animals you may eat: the ox,
    the sheep, the goat, 5 the deer, the gazelle, the roe deer,
    the wild goat, the ibex, the antelope and the mountain
    sheep. 6 You may eat any animal that has a split hoof
    divided in two and that chews the cud. 7 However, of those
    that chew the cud or that have a split hoof completely
    divided you may not eat the camel, the rabbit or the coney.
    Although they chew the cud, they do not have a split hoof;
    they are ceremonially unclean for you. 8 The pig is also
    unclean; although it has a split hoof, it does not chew the
    cud. You are not to eat their meat or touch their
    carcasses. 9 Of all the creatures living in the water, you
    may eat any that has fins and scales. 10 But anything that
    does not have fins and scales you may not eat; for you it
    is unclean. 11 You may eat any clean bird. 12 But these you
    may not eat: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, 13
    the red kite, the black kite, any kind of falcon, 14 any
    kind of raven, 15 the horned owl, the screech owl, the
    gull, any kind of hawk, 16 the little owl, the great owl,
    the white owl, 17 the desert owl, the osprey, the
    cormorant, 18 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and
    the bat. 19 All flying insects that swarm are unclean to
    you; do not eat them. 20 But any winged creature that is
    clean you may eat. 21 Do not eat anything you find already
    dead. You may give it to an alien living in any of your
    towns, and he may eat it, or you may sell it to a
    foreigner. But you are a people holy to the LORD your God.
    Do not cook a young goat in its mother's milk.

    1 Kings 8 5 and King Solomon and the entire assembly of
    Israel that had gathered about him were before the ark,
    sacrificing so many sheep and cattle that they could not
    be recorded or counted. [...] 63 Solomon offered a
    sacrifice of fellowship offerings to the LORD: twenty-two
    thousand cattle and a hundred and twenty thousand sheep
    and goats. So the king and all the Israelites dedicated
    the temple of the LORD.

    Mark 7 18 "Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that
    nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him
    `unclean'? 19 For it doesn't go into his heart but into his
    stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus
    declared all foods "clean."😉

    Quoted message said:

    Never mind if the cows step on ants,

    The point still remains that some types of meat involve
    fewer deaths than some types of veggies.

    Quoted message said:

    we have to learn to sit on our hands and myob not
    just byob.

  18. "John Coleman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:8ydkc.827$7S2.694@newsfe1-win...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    draining of fields, one meal of soy or rice based
    product is likely to involve more animal deaths than
    hundreds of meals

    so eat organic fruit and nuts


    ==================
    Where are you importing them in from? I just love looking at
    all the vegan recipies that are for exotic dishes that call
    for foods from around the world. Shipping all that supposed
    'cruelty-free' stuff at the expense of untold millions of
    other animals, just to keep from eating 1 cow. What a hoot!

    Quoted message said:


    John

  19. Ah, Rick Etter....

    What a stupid, fanatical piece of [censored].

    I once came to this NG as an omni, simply looking for
    advice and

    started in by calling me a murderer, etc. Hell of a welcome
    for someone who was very confused and just looking for a
    little advice.

    Hopefully he'll soon choke on his own vomit.

  20. "Laurie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    "rick etter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news-
    :[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    "Ron" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    All he does is babble.

    re> Sane people know that you are a desperate killer,
    re> looking for
    absolution... Thanks, rick, for proving Ron's point with
    more mindless babble.

    Laurie


    ================
    Thanks for yet again proving vegan hypocrisy and dishonesty.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.