I read posts here that call different things, "harmful to humanity."  Others call something, "good" or "bad" or "evil."

A very simple question, who gets to decide the definition of  "harmful to humanity" and what is there critieria? The same for "good," "bad," and "evil?" These are not material terms. If everything is material isn't there just "is" and not these moral declarations if one is being thoroughly atheist?

Help me understand your position so I am fair and honest about the views. Thanks.

Views: 7973

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

@Heather - " vegans rarely understand the difference between nutrition and satiation" - Yes, just like John doesn't understand the difference between discussing and proselytizing.  LOL

No. I understand the weak argument you may wish to make about nutrition. It was all the 'imaginings' bit that didn't make sense.

Keith. Lol


Well, John, do you wish to discuss the nutritional obstacles imposed by the cult of veganism or would you simply like to avoid dealing with the facts?

I would like you to explain the basis upon which you make moral decisions, clearly, just as I have done. Once I understand your position I will gladly discuss your survey of vegans and signs of malnourishment you have observed.

I've already done that, John - but you seem unable to see anything in my statement other than the word 'starvation' - which doesn't actually appear.

Your proselytizing rhetorical gymnastics have now stretched us to the end of our allotted replies because of your obstinate fixation on a word that didn't appear in my original post.  If you wish to proceed, I would ask that you go back to the start and reply to my original post in a way that addresses something which I actually stated.

You haven't. We are at an impasse. I have no idea what you mean by 'imaginings' and human condition. Etc. I can't be bothered to ask you again.

Yes, well that was the best I could do to respond to your 'starvation' question because I had no idea from whence it came.  Perhaps you could rephrase your question based on my original post, and try to include something that actually addresses my position on the topic.

I'm sorry if that would make it impossible for you to twist the line of discussion into more proselytizing about your menu cult, but I'm not interested in your continued derailment here.

First you agree that starvation in the world is a moral issue (see above) then you say it isn't (see above). So, you mean it is a moral issue for other people, but not you?

We've been through this before, John, so I can only assume that you are trolling or just being obstinately ignorant.  I've stated, clearly, that I perceive an enormous divide between balanced nutrition and mere satiation.  Troll someplace else.  If you are not trolling, then I can't help you because you are incapable of understanding the difference between balanced nutrition and satiation.

Which charm school did you go to?

Penn & Teller Bullshit!  It's a great show and they avoid using their infamous skills of misdirection when it comes to the topic at hand.  So, you still ignorant of the difference between balanced nutrition and satiation or are you still just trolling?


© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service