- McLibel -

Re: McLibel & All Others Who Believe Animals Have A Soul

Posted by: Gideon Hallett ( amateur anarchist, UK ) on December 05, 1996 at 19:18:06:

In Reply to: McLibel & All Others Who Believe Animals Have A Soul posted by Sharon on November 01, 1996 at 03:32:42:

Aaaah. Dinner. A particularly fresh and juicy target, too...

> Why don't we worry about the things that are destroying our
> lives and our children's lives.

Like the American rightwing fundamentalist brigade?

> God put cattle on this earth for us to eat, evidently there
> are those who have never read the Bible.

Have you ever read the Bible? If you can read Aramaic, then
you're a very rare person. What you call "The Bible" *thump*
is a hundredth copy of a book that was translated through at
least 4 languages (Aramaic-Early Greek-Latin-Middle English).
Needless to say, there are a lot of differences between some
of the 4th century Greek texts and the 20th century American
ones. Oh, and Yeshua (Jesus) was a socialist hippy liberal.

Also, does that mean that we were put on the earth to be
food for tigers, sharks, lions and all the major predators?
Or does your homocentric view of the world not recognize a
higher predator?

> It's really funny how we worry about the cattle and various
> other animals, yet our souls are headed for Hell because of
> our lifestyles

My travel plans do not, at the moment, include Bible belt
America. So I'm not going anywhere near Hell right now,
thanks. If I should find myself in Hell, I'm sure that
you'll be on hand to give me a guided tour of the best

Oh, by the way, I'm an animal. So are you. Which of us
is more humane?

> we don't think anything of killing an unborn
> baby (call it what you like).

Abortion should not be necessary in a culture with
advanced and reliable birth control. It is _never_ taken
lightly, and most of the unplanned pregnancies that cause
it to happen could be avoided by proper sex education (that's
"sin" or "immorality" to you). My views on this have the
added bonus - I don't have to have the hypocrisy to kill
doctors (who frequently have families of their own) to save
the life of something that might not even survive full term
anyway. Anyway, back to relevance.

> This stupid controversy could be taken so far, maybe we
> shouldn't eat vegetables, how dare you people to pull
> that poor carrot out of the ground as it is gasping for
> its very last breath!! GET REAL!!

It cannot be denied that plants are alive, and that eating
them involves death. The major debate is whether plants feel
something analogous to "pain". Plants are a less polluting
source of food than the current meat industry, and a more
efficient one - these are practical reasons rather than
moral ones. That is not the primary issue of this group (it
is a secondary issue, however!).

The major purpose of this case is to highlight the damage
that McDonalds is doing to the world's health, the environment
and the workforce they treat so badly. And that is why, win
or lose, the McLibel Two have won against the odds in the end.
McD's can no longer hold up the clown mask and smile with the
same conviction.

If you can tell me what "reality" is, I'd be happy to get some.
I suspect that "reality" to you means "the way I think it ought
to be". Judging by your tone, I, as a bisexual liberal anarchist,
would be first to the gas chambers in your "reality". Which
makes me glad to experience my own reality.

Regarding your mind, it amazes me that you can live in
something that small.

(If I've said anything in that flame offensive enough to warrant
my death, I'd rather you used a gun and made it quick. Bleeding
to death is a rather goring)

Follow Ups:


The Debating Room Post a Followup