You need to read yer bibble.He's flat out lying. Either that or he's just trolling.
Since we've had these same debates at least 10,000 times, and he keeps creating new threads and bumping old threads and replying to old posts of mine and continually baiting me to these threads.
I think gramps needs a new hobby.
Buttercup believes in her own version of the story. If she doesn't like any part of the story 'it didn't happen'.
I couldn't agree more with everything you said there. Very well stated, too.
And I absolutely love that Proverbs scripture! In fact that is ONE of the scriptures that convicts and inspires me to be a voice for them and to do what I've been doing....through LM and CCC.
God sees everything.
I think that once you have that paradigm shift (it really is a paradigm shift), and when you learn more about it all, and really think about it....you start to see more and more how truly diabolical and horrific it all is.
We're talking about fellow creations of God who are just like little children....totally innocent, pure hearted, who look to US to take care of them and not hurt them. And what do we do to the animals who are just like little children? We betray them in the worst way. We put them in gas chambers, where they literally scream in horror before they suffocate to death, or we slit their throats and hang them upside-down to bleed to death, just like in a horror movie. You can see the fear and desperation in their eyes as they're literally being dragged to slaughter.
Like that Proverb says, God is watching. And He commands us to be merciful. Repeatedly. Throughout the scriptures from cover to cover. The problem is, most Christians don't apply those mercy scriptures to the animals, only to humans. Which is I think is the main error, and a huge error, because it misses the point entirely.
LOL, that's convincing---not. Newsflash, don't base your argument on SPECULATION. SMFH.
My post is the only one that does make sense. SMH. Thank you for admitting that the entire premise of your post(s) is speculation.
One more time. His speculation is worth no more than yours. Again thank you for admitting that you base your arguments on speculation. Your speculation is as empty as anyone else's.One more time. I'll say it as clearly as possible for you... ALL the interpretations of that passage involve speculation, since the text is very limited and doesn't say how God made the clothing (or skin) for Adam and Eve.
And I never stated what MY view was on it. I simply posted the various interpretations.
So unless you didn't read or comprehend my post, your post didn't make sense. And not only that, it was extremely hypocritical, since WOODNUTZ was the one speculating that God killed and skinned a lamb, when the text simply does not say that. But you're not saying he's speculating, only me. When I'm the one who didn't even put forth my view.
You put forth your vegan view on every post you make. You will spare no end to attempt to discredit and insult carnivores and every post you make supports my view. I am just glad that we cleared up the fact that you base a great deal of your opinion on speculation.
Since you decided to bring Carl into it--I will remind you of something else he said, paraphrased, This is a public forum where opinions are expressed. If you don't like the opinions, you are free to leave. As for the BS about my interest, again, you're speculating on something that you have no insight too---obviously, I have interest or I wouldn't be posting. The truth of the matter is you don't want to tolerate opposing views so you try to twist the narrative into personal attacks, IOW, projection.
I always found it a bit silly that those who condemn those who eat meat, are always striving to make non-meat products look and taste like meat.Very nice essay..hit quite a few nails on the head. The gist of it is simple...for most of us, the plant-based diet was more about social compulsion and less about actual desire.
I used the Yahoo link to get around the Atlantic paywall.
A few snippets..it's a longish essay:
Making America healthy again, it seems, starts with a double cheeseburger and fries. Earlier this month, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. visited a Steak ’n Shake in Florida and shared a meal with Fox News’s Sean Hannity. The setting was no accident: Kennedy has praised the fast-food chain for switching its cooking oil from seed oil, which he falsely claims causes illness, to beef tallow. “People are raving about these french fries,” Kennedy said after eating one, before commending other restaurants that fry with beef tallow: Popeyes, Buffalo Wild Wings, Outback Steakhouse.
To put it another way, if you order fries at Steak ’n Shake, cauliflower wings at Buffalo Wild Wings, or the Bloomin’ Onion at Outback, your food will be cooked in cow fat. For more than a decade, cutting down on meat and other animal products has been idealized as a healthier, more ethical way to eat. Guidelines such as “Eat Food. Not Too Much. Mostly Plants” may have disproportionately appealed to liberals in big cities, but the meat backlash has been unavoidable across the United States. The Obama administration passed a law to limit meat in school lunches; more recently, meat alternatives such as Impossible Burger and Beyond Meat have flooded grocery-store shelves, and fast-food giants are even serving them up in burgers and nuggets. It all heralded a future that seemed more tempeh than tomahawk steak: “Could this be the beginning of the end of meat?” wrote The New York Times in 2022.
Now the goal of eating less meat has lost its appeal. A convergence of cultural and nutritional shifts, supercharged by the return of the noted hamburger-lover President Donald Trump, has thrust meat back to the center of the American plate. It’s not just MAGA bros and MAHA moms who resist plant-based eating. A wide swath of the U.S. seems to be sending a clear message: Nobody should feel bad about eating meat.
Many people are relieved to hear it. Despite all of the attention on why people should eat less meat—climate change, health, animal welfare—Americans have kept consuming more and more of it. From 2014 to 2024, annual per capita meat consumption rose by nearly 28 pounds, the equivalent of roughly 100 chicken breasts. One way to make sense of this “meat paradox,” as the ethicist Peter Singer branded it in The Atlantic in 2023, is that there is a misalignment between how people want to eat and the way they actually do. The thought of suffering cows releasing methane bombs into the atmosphere pains me, but I love a medium-rare porterhouse.
Go back and review every one of my posts to you. I have made it clear that you have your opinions and I have mine. I have never berated your choices but you make a mission out of berating anyone who chooses differently from you. Now stop lying.
LOL, a quick review of this thread -- from your post #273
There you go again. Where have I been hostile or hateful? Please link to it. I have simply said that it is great that you love your vegan lifestyle, more power to you. I love my culinary choices as well. The difference is your nonstop attempts to berate anyone whose choices don't agree with you.
You are more than welcome to use that same button if you can't tolerate my very civil disagreement with how you view my lifestyle and dietary choices.
