From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Subject: Re: At last, we're almost there!
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 20:56:40 GMT

In article <102841@bu.edu> kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:
    >>I don't like lima beans. Are my reasons groundless? After
    >>all, the stores stock and sell lima be beans so certainly
    >>SOME people out there like them. They aren't poisonous. I
    >>just can't stand them.
    >>
    >So, do you refuse to associate with lima-bean-eaters?
    >
    >You can, but if you do, your reasons are groundless.

Brian, this was sucker line.

If we substitute "meat eaters" for "lima bean eaters", then we'd have
your position being one that vegetarians have no reason for NOT
associating with meat eaters, including lunch times. I tend to believe
that you don't follow that line.

1. Man is an omnivore. He/she naturally eats both meat and non-meat foods.

2. Some people are vegetarian. It is perfectly moral to be a vegetarian
   or a meat eater.

3. Not eating meat is somewhat unnatural. Zinc and some protein defieciencies
   happen, especiall with those "pure" vegetarians (no eggs, no milk, ...).
   Without mineral supplements, decades of pure vegetarianism will lead
   to minor to major mineral defiency problems.

4. Some vegetarians, especially those of the "pure" kind, can get almost
   physically sick at seeing meat eaten.


Now, I have never said that I like or dislike homosexuals. Nor have I ever
said, until now, that I like or dislike vegetarians. I find that people
that are vegetarians have been just about 100% the kind of people I
don't care to associate with (outside of work). Perhaps this is because
I feel that vegetarianism is a mild form of irrational hysteria over
food.

However, be that as it may, a vegetarian may be sick at the sight of
a meat eater chomping on a hamburger. The vegetarian may prefer to
not eat lunch with meat eaters, and indeed, may very well have more
friends that are vegetarians than meat eaters.

So, it is NOT for YOUR or ME to decide whether it is groundless or not
for another person to like yet another person, FOR ANY REASONS WHATSOEVER.

Now, eating lima beans is a rather small part of a persons life. However,
if lima bean eating, cooking, collecting, growing, was a major part of a
persons life, I doubt that we would have much in common. I probably
would not like them -- but, that does not mean I hate them. It more
or less means I don't care about them.

Now, if those lima bean eaters suddenly started trying to get laws passed
requiring McDonalds to offer lima beans, then yes, I would start disliking
them. After all, if McDonalds thought people would buy lima beans for meals,
it would offer them. As they don't, any laws requiring them to do so are
coercive.

    >>There is a HUGE gulf between "no overt rational reason" for
    >>disliking homosexuals, and the "unfortunately ... groundless"
    >>remark.
    >>
    >Yep, like the difference between not liking homosexuals, and
    >not liking homosexual activities.
    >....
    >>It's not groundless, it's not fear, hate, or a phobia -- it's
    >>the way we all like and dislike different things.
    >>
    >But avoiding people who like doing things you hate is totally
    >groundless, unless they attempt to get you to do these
    >things.

So when a vegetarian declines as offer to eat lunch with you because
they are sickened by meat eating, they have GROUNDLESS reasons? Even
though not eating meat is somewhat irrational and against the natural
nature of man?

I don't like skinheads. I don't like fundamentalist religious fanatics.

I avoid both.

You don't? You find those reasons groundless?

What you do is a part of you as well as your internal mentality.


-- 
I believe Gennifer Flowers.

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em! (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)