On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 09:20:38 GMT, Dutch  wrote:

>pearl wrote:
>> "Dutch"  wrote in message news:XhQti.39249$fJ5.34707@pd7urf1no...
>
>>> He just doesn't get it, they *read* those books, they DON'T AGREE with
>>> the arguments! They could have said, "Mr Regan, you fool, didn't you
>>> read *my* book? but they all have too much class to put on such a
>>> childish display.
>> 
>> He 'got' that their arguments reflected ignorance of the literature.
>
>They aren't ignorant, they read "The literature", as you converts like 
>to refer to your blessed sacred scrolls, several of them remark on that 
>fact, and they *reject* the arguments. It's not the revealed truth of 
>God you know, they're the *opinions* of people that agree with Reagan, 
>and *his own books*. He's an arrogant toad addressing highly respected 
>authors and fellow philosophers in that manner, but typical of the ARA, 
>he feels superior to them and entitled to verbally abuse them.
>
><snip usual verbal abuse>
>
>

While I am all for treating animals humanely... Tom takes it to a level of 
stupidity. Conveniently forgetting that carnivores do exist on all levels of 
the animal kingdom.


"Dr L Oh"  wrote in message 
news:7skad39n2jn445kmcha69jd2uhmnsmogs1@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 09:20:38 GMT, Dutch  wrote:
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>> "Dutch"  wrote in message 
>>> news:XhQti.39249$fJ5.34707@pd7urf1no...
>>
>>>> He just doesn't get it, they *read* those books, they DON'T AGREE with
>>>> the arguments! They could have said, "Mr Regan, you fool, didn't you
>>>> read *my* book? but they all have too much class to put on such a
>>>> childish display.
>>>
>>> He 'got' that their arguments reflected ignorance of the literature.
>>
>>They aren't ignorant, they read "The literature", as you converts like
>>to refer to your blessed sacred scrolls, several of them remark on that
>>fact, and they *reject* the arguments. It's not the revealed truth of
>>God you know, they're the *opinions* of people that agree with Reagan,
>>and *his own books*. He's an arrogant toad addressing highly respected
>>authors and fellow philosophers in that manner, but typical of the ARA,
>>he feels superior to them and entitled to verbally abuse them.
>>
>><snip usual verbal abuse>
>>
>>
>

"GoMavs"  wrote in message news:CvdBi.6060$5h.5244@trnddc03...
>
> While I am all for treating animals humanely... Tom takes it to a level of
> stupidity. Conveniently forgetting that carnivores do exist on all levels of
> the animal kingdom.

Oxymoron.

'in·hu·man
adj.
1. Lacking kindness, pity, or compassion; cruel.
2. Deficient in emotional warmth; cold.
3. Not suited for human needs: an inhuman environment.
4. Not of ordinary human form; monstrous.
..
inhuman
adj 1: without compunction or human feeling; "in cold
blood"; "cold-blooded killing"; "insensate destruction"
[syn: cold, cold-blooded, insensate] 2: belonging to or
resembling something nonhuman; "something dark and
inhuman in form"; "a babel of inhuman noises"
..'
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?qinhuman