[StrongHeartsWin]

For readers just joining the debate, Kamehameha asserted I was turning this into an "environmental" argument, which I replied with a request for him to cite the place I did so by quoting me. Instead of him responding, belverron decided to reference it for him by digging this quote of mine up:

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin
As for your evidence, which animal is the most destructive to the Earth and to itself, always thinking of better and more efficient ways of destroying one another? Why do you think that animal will be around when the smoke clears?

However, my reply above was directly in response to Kamehameha`s assertion on intelligence and therefore it was quite within the bounds of acceptability to answer that since he set up his argument of intelligence within the paradigm of all of Earth`s environment. It is therefore he who went off on the tangeant leading to an "environmental argument." Even there though, he has judged wrong, because I have not put forth the reason here or in recent posts to choose vegetarianism out of concerns for the environment. Here are two posts of his that show he erroneously made that accusation and the point where he chose to go off on the tangeant:

Quote by: Kamehameha Infact, there is evidence to suggest that our vastly superior intelligence over all other species on this planet was contributed to the large amount of protein that our troglodytic ancestors consumed. Quote: We are experience a dilemma that comes with technology. The very fact that we occupy the position of the race[amongst all animals on Earht] that CAN cause such destruction does say something in terms of intelligence. Intelligence is a tool. It won't always be used wisely.

Quote by: belverron It was in his previous post, SHW [belverron chimes in that I attempted to turn it into an environmental issue] . I don't think it was asking too much of you to remember that, do you?

belverron, your defense of him is in error. Above I clearly outline why.

Do you even read all of his posts? He posted an interesting article about cannibalism that touched on the protein issue he brought up.

Yes, I have read all his posts very carefully, like I do with all those who debate me. I take debate seriously. belverron, where is the "interesting article" you said he posted on cannibalism? Is it in this thread? I went back a few pages looking for it but haven`t found it. Since you know where it is, could you direct me to it? Perhaps I am just missing it for some reason. I would be glad to read it if I can find it.

I asked him for excerpts of any research papers and link URLs to those but he has yet to post them. We can all bring up issues, but if it is there to support an assertion like he has done, one should also post where he got that from out of courtesy. So, Kamehama? Where is it/are those excerpts and URLs?

This is the second time I've asked you to stop treating other posters like children.

Where was the first time? In any event, I take issue with your statement. I do not treat my debate opponants like children. If I did, I`d be worried about hurting their feelings and handle them with kid gloves. I treat them like adults who can handle a number of debate styles other than ad hominem attacks. Don`t worry about protecting him or anyone here when it comes to simply debate tactics. If it is an ad hominem attack, then I welcome you coming to his aid. If not, let him swim or sink on his own. It is good for education and you might be wise to keep that in mind yourself. After all, this is a debate site with the name Volconvo, which was chosen due to the heated nature of arguement because of the controversial issues meant to be brought up. Obviously vegetarianism and Animal Rights rankles some people' skin and therefore such issues are quite at home in Volconvo.

I don't see why anyone tolerates your mighter-debater-than-thou attitude.

That is a subjective view. Though, admittedly, I am quite confident in my debating skills. But, is there a forum rule against confidence or thinking one is a better debater than someone else?

Please, try to stay focused on the issues. That is not me. If you want to make me famous here on Volconvo by making me the issue, then go ahead and create a thread titled, "Discussing StrongHeartsWin." But remember, even in such a thread as that the forum rules of "no personal attacks" (i.e. ad hominem attacks) still apply.

You're in a minority here, so it might benefit you to behave with some grace.

This forum has very objective moderators and admin. I haven`t sensed anything akin to "the majority" rules -- because the majority rules is not logic to rule by. "Majority Rules or the Majority is Right" minus democracy or guidelines is simply another name for "mob mentality." I do not support mob mentality. Do you? If not, then why bring up minority or majority? It is irrelevant -- unless you think the mods and admin resort to such without being objective.

You're not winning any friends with your supercilious attitude.

I actually looked that word up.

hmmm...well, I do think that eating flesh is the lesser moral choice for diet. Do people of higher morals occupy a higher position of being "good"? I think they do. If they relate that their opponant is choosing the lesser moral choice, then by declaring that they will project a degree of haughtiness or even selfrighteousness just due to the nature of having to declare the actions of their opponents wrong. I can`t help that. That is the nature of debates when morals are the main issue. Abolitionists surely seen as self-righteous, too, in their condemnation of slavery. Being self-rightious or haughty is not a bad thing in and of itself if that position is the right one. Like the arguments against slavery had to wait to be decided to be right, so do the arguments against animal exploitation. In both cases, the early proponants for both movements have never and will never see their haughty and selfrighteous attitude vindicated due to the length of the battle.

Are you here to make frinds, belverron? I am here to learn the arguements against my arguments, improve my arguments, and to give the arguments a hearing. I am here firstly for debate. What is the order in your reasons for being here reside?