From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Hunter's legitimate concern
Organization: WP Group
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 04:26:03 GMT


Russell Lawrence writes:
rl> You obviously have a double-standard.  You're quick to criticize 
rl> your opponents for their alleged failure to listen to your facts 
rl> and reasons, yet you yourself proclaim that it's sad when other 
rl> people ask you to substantiate your superstitious allegation that 
rl> the "gods" want you to (mis)treat animals as you see fit.  

From article <1570n7INNque@agate.berkeley.edu>, by linan@argon.berkeley.edu (Mike Linan):
ml> Wrong again Russell (and again and again).  Can you never get it 
ml> right.  Or is that the plan?  Play stupid, like what I'm saying is 
ml> so hard to understand.  
ml> 
ml> I have told you why I view hunting, killing and eating animals 
ml> morally acceptable.  There are many reasons but, ultimately the 
ml> reason is my belief in my God.  Not "gods" so don't misrepresent 
ml> or insult me with your games Russell.  

Whether you have one "god" or a hundred "gods" doesn't make much 
difference, as I see it.   What I don't understand is why you 
think it's reasonable for you to make the claim that your 
opponents have failed to listen to "facts and reason", when you 
yourself feel the need to invoke a "god" or "goddess" to bolster 
your position.  

Would you be more inclined to respect my position if I were to tell
you that I'm speaking on behalf of the one, true god and that the 
real God has revealed to me that you have been mislead by Satan?

> ...
rl> Incidently, historians have catalogued many thousands of gods 
rl> that have been conjured up since the dawn of human history.  
rl> Would you say that someone who doesn't believe in each and every 
rl> one of these gods is an "ignorant" man?  Or, is a man only 
rl> "ignorant", in your not-so-humble-opinion, when he fails to obey 
rl> a "god" that just happens to support your position for some
rl> mysterious reason.  

ml> My God doesn't just happen to support my position fool.  My 
ml> position is what it is because of what my God says.  YOU just 
ml> happen to be wrong in the eyes of my God.  You obviously don't 
ml> know what the word is and you also show contempt for the word.  
ml> That makes you ignorant buddy.  

Roughly half of the books published in support of slavery prior to
the Civil War were written by clerics who claimed to be speaking
for "god".   Do you think these clerics were misinformed in some
way?  Or would you accept the notion that they, too, spoke for
"god" just as you claim to speak for "god"?

The history books are full of examples of men who participated
in some incredibly unjust actions while claiming to have the
support of "god".   How can you be sure that you're not following
in their footsteps, and misusing the concept of a divine being
simply to justify your own selfish actions?

> ...
rl> Do all these gods truly exist, Mike?  Or, is your god the only one 
rl> that you consider worthy-by-virtue-of-mere-belief? 

ml> You tell me Russell.  Do they?  I know mine does and I'm not 
ml> inclined to prove that or anything else to you.  You obviously 
ml> will stand your ground no matter what facts or beliefs are put in 
ml> front of you.  

Do you have any evidence to support the notion that a real, unimaginary
god truly approves of your (mis)treatment of animals?  

Incidently, Mike, would your "god" approve of my actions if I were to
shoot a dog or cat?

> ...
ml> See here is where you are wrong (once again) Russell.  For all 
ml> your self proclaimed intelligence, you still cannot understand 
ml> that I do not *need* or *expect* you to accept anything I say or 
ml> do.  I could not possibly care less whether you agree with me or 
ml> not.  Is that now clear enough for you?  

rl> You're not making any sense here, Mike.  I've never 
rl> "self-proclaimed" my intelligence in our conversations, nor have 
rl> I offered any sort of credentials or supernatural claims (unlike 
rl> you) to support my position.  Rather than declaring that my 
rl> statements are true because "god" says they are, as you yourself
rl> might do, I feel obliged to offer verifiable facts and/or logical 
rl> reasons.  

ml> Oh come on Russell.  You must really think you are dealing with 
ml> idiots.  You have implyed your intelligence through comments left 
ml> and right.  Don't play coy with me.  You are really high on 
ml> yourself and that is obvious.  You certainly come across to me as 
ml> I have discribed.  

Can you point me to a posting where I "proclaimed" my own intelligence?

> ...
rl> I understand how you feel.  Given the growing diversity of religious
rl> beliefs in the United States, however, I'm not sure that the argument,
rl> "god says this" or "god says that" is going to carry much weight
rl> with open-minded people.  Maybe you should ask the "god" or "goddess"
rl> to give you a certificate of some kind, so we'll know that you really 
rl> are qualified to speak on his or her behalf, and aren't just another 
rl> deluded individual who thinks that god wants him to kill.

ml> Maybe I should just ignore ignorant fools such as yourself 
ml> Russell.  It is apparant that a self proclaimed pervert's opinions 
ml> have no value to me...  

Can you point me to a posting where I've proclaimed myself to be a
"pervert"?

ml> I also do not consider you to be Mr.  t.p.a.  Just the worst 
ml> example since traub.  So, hopefully you won't mind if I pay no 
ml> attention to the bullsh*t that comes from you mouth from now on 
ml> and concentrate my efforts on those who are less condesending, 
ml> arrogant and pompous.  

In view of the fact that I've never claimed to speak for "god", I 
find it incredibly amazing a person like yourself, who's a close 
personal friend of a supreme being, would accuse me of being 
condescending, arrogant and pompous.  

rl> Satisfy my curiosity on one more point:  If one of your "gods" or 
rl> "goddesses" ordered you to kill human animals for some reason that
rl> he or she had failed to explain, would you obey or disobey?

ml> Wait just a minute Russell, I'm getting a message from one of the 
ml> many Gods out there and it has your name in it.  There is a task 
ml> I must obey.  See you later Russell, old fool!  

Would you mind answering my question: If one of your "gods" or 
"goddesses" ordered you to kill human animals for some reason 
that he or she had failed to explain, would you obey or disobey?  

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals