Posted:
#51
wow this sensorship b.u.l.l.s.h.i.t here on covers is really annoying
33 Elephants smoked in Chad.
Posted:
#52
Quote Originally Posted by searchwarrant:
Scal doesn't know a gawd damn thing. He chooses a ridiculous one dimentional argument and stays the course until everything becomes completely absurd, distorted and beyond logic and reason. This is the case once again.
The humane society boasts 11 million members and I'll be willing to bet a significant portion agree with me not you in terms of the hypocrisy of your stance.
While that doesn't make me 'right' per se, it certainly discredits your 'distorted, beyond logic and reason' defamation.
You are grandstanding for elephants on one hand (nice but hypocritical) while eating a steak with a fork in the other directly or indirectly supporting factory farming, supporting a worldwide daily holocaust, supporting speciesism, which does far more ecological damage and results in veritable rivers as big and wide as the Nile in animal blood, blood that results in far more pain, suffering, and death for animals in general when compared to 33 elephants.
If you actually gave some thought to what I am saying and disregard your dislike for me, it becomes fairly oblivious you'd have a hard time winning a debate on this topic. Unfortunately, it is unlikely you'll ever give it some thought.
Posted:
#53
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
While the thread is laudable in terms of exposing poachers, if you eat chicken and support this thread you are engaging in speciesism. You are favoring one species over another, whether human, animal elephant, chicken or otherwise. It's hypocrisy. It's a good cause but so in conflict with your own meat consumption, you don't have a leg to stand on in an attempt to garner sympathy or outrage.
While the thread is laudable in terms of exposing poachers, if you eat chicken and support this thread you are engaging in speciesism. You are favoring one species over another, whether human, animal elephant, chicken or otherwise. It's hypocrisy. It's a good cause but so in conflict with your own meat consumption, you don't have a leg to stand on in an attempt to garner sympathy or outrage.
Chickens are arguably the most brutalized animal on this earth and in history. 23 million are killed a day. If they are 'yummy' to you, that's cute, buy don't feel terrible for these elephants as though something wrong is being done here while you willfully support a veritable animal holocaust when you have lunch or dinner.
So if I like spinach but not lettuce, does that mean plantism?
If I like coke but not pepsi, does that make me a sodist?
You posting in here but not in anothers thread is posterism and or threadist of you.
Shame on you Scal, you should add some "em" to your pathetic. 
Posted:
#55
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
^ when search talked about absurd arguments he was addressing the wrong guy and spoke too soon.
^ when search talked about absurd arguments he was addressing the wrong guy and spoke too soon.
You can be contraian all you want for your good pleasure. Have fun.
What was your argument? That being upset about one thing and not another makes you a bad person who has no moral compass? You literally compared elephants to chickens. Apples to oranges ring a bell?
Im not being contrarian, I am being logical and correct. Which I guess would indeed seem contrarian to you on both counts.
Posted:
#56
I can't believe what I've read in this thread and what this joke of a person posted in it. Scalabrine, the self proclaimed rights protector of minority criminals, chickens, and the American way.
He mocks this mostly white forum sporting the worst white player in the NBA as his name an avatar preaching about the rights for the minorities.
He mocks this mostly white forum sporting the worst white player in the NBA as his name an avatar preaching about the rights for the minorities.
Posted:
#58
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:
What was your argument? That being upset about one thing and not another makes you a bad person who has no moral compass? You literally compared elephants to chickens. Apples to oranges ring a bell?
Im not being contrarian, I am being logical and correct. Which I guess would indeed seem contrarian to you on both counts.
No, my argument is that it's the height of hypocrisy with regard to animal conservation or humane treatment of animals and respect for their life, when you grandstand for endangered rhinos while consuming meat virtually every day of your life, lending to the severe environmental degradation of factory farming (that statement is not in dispute by reputable researchers), and worse a veritable animal holocaust of animals much closer to human beings in terms of 'animal intelligence' (pigs being the foremost example).
And Search counters with "Save the horses" and "Save the chickens" statements and thread just to mock an argument which questions what is at the center of his entire lifestyle: his daily sustenance.
It is because he is afraid of questioning his way of life and is insulted by someone attempting to question his moral judgement.
So he fights back like a child. It's not surprising.
If you want to eat meat, go all the way with it.
But pretending that the endangered rhino matters, or that dog meat is substantially different than rhino meat (or dog fur or dog paw or whatever society would deem valuable on a dog like a horn on a rhino) is hypocrisy. I'm just telling him where he stands. Eat away.
Hot Forum Topics
