Greetings.

[brimstoneSalad]

Because I don't like my OWN suffering, i'd rather watch others suffer from a safe distance.

You're contradicting yourself, earlier you answered "Absolutely" to the question:

Do you desire so much to cause suffering to others, that you are willing to destroy yourself and your own quality of life in the process?

If you don't want to go to Africa to hack villagers to pieces with a roving warlord's mob of child soldiers, why would you want to experience the world of comparable discomfort and poor quality of life that would result from the collapse of society due to war and environmental disaster?

[Sadistic I Am]

Ok, maybe i WOULDN'T mind going to africa and watching people get murdered, if it wasn't so inconvenient for me. I'm not going to drop what i'm doing and get on a flight to Africa just for that. I'm not THAT obsessed with suffering.

Heh. Besides, there's no need when i can watch ISIS beheading videos.

[brimstoneSalad]

Ok, maybe i WOULDN'T mind going to africa and watching people get murdered, if it wasn't so inconvenient for me. I'm not going to drop what i'm doing and get on a flight to Africa just for that. I'm not THAT obsessed with suffering.

Why can't you understand that the cataclysmic events brought on by climate change, disease, and world resource shortages will be more inconvenient than a trip to Africa, and less enjoyable in terms of amenities and the amount of violence you'd be able to witness?

If you don't want to go to Africa now, you certainly shouldn't want much worse (in terms of quality of life and convenience) brought to you for much less (in terms of reward of witnessing violence).

Heh. Besides, there's no need when i can watch ISIS beheading videos.

So, why don't you take that same attitude on other matters? You're being inconsistent.

[Sadistic I Am]

Because you're beating a dead horse here. You've already won, and i accept that. I'm getting more and more confused every time i read another of your posts, so mine are probably going to make less sense.

[EquALLity]

Because you're beating a dead horse here. You've already won, and i accept that. I'm getting more and more confused every time i read another of your posts, so mine are probably going to make less sense.

What do you mean by that? Are you going vegan now?

[Sadistic I Am]

Oh no. Not at all. But i admit that i have absolutely no justifiable reason to eat meat. But I'm doing it anyway.

[brimstoneSalad]

Oh no. Not at all. But i admit that i have absolutely no justifiable reason to eat meat. But I'm doing it anyway.

It's like a Christian admitting that he has no justifiable reason to believe in Jesus and 'God', but he does anyway (despite all science, historical evidence, logical argument, etc. to the contrary).

Getting somebody to admit that he is behaving completely irrationally is about all you can do. After that, all you can do is wait.
As they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

I would suggest, if "Sadistic I Am" is in any way disgusted by the irrational behavior of Christians, he may in the least feel uncomfortable mirroring it. If his loathing for Christianity, and thus discomfort in behaving similarly, ever grows larger than his enjoyment of animal products, he may stop eating them not out of any kind of compassion, but instead out of spite.
It would at least be novel.

[EquALLity]

As they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

Uh-oh, I may have been saying that expression wrong. I blame Pat Condell.

But it turns out that some people in Iraq, for some inexplicable reason, don’t actually want freedom and democracy imposed on them from outside, which just proves the truth in the old saying, America, that you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him suck your cock.

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Zqbz563pNQ)

Hahaha, just kidding.

Well, I hope he comes along, but I doubt it.

[brimstoneSalad]

Well, I hope he comes along, but I doubt it.

I'm not even sure if that would be useful. It would more likely just be interesting (how many vegans do you think exist out of spite alone?).

He is a psychopath, and a sadist. Unless there was some way for him to develop a conscience (not sure if possible, if he doesn't even really love friends and family), in a consequential sense, we might want to consider that maybe we don't even need (and the movement may not necessarily benefit from) the most innately evil people in the world going vegan.
These kinds of people are one in a thousand, so it's probably a waste of effort to try to get them to feel something when they're inherently incapable of it.

[EquALLity]

I'm not even sure if that would be useful. It would more likely just be interesting (how many vegans do you think exist out of spite alone?).

He is a psychopath, and a sadist. Unless there was some way for him to develop a conscience (not sure if possible, if he doesn't even really love friends and family), in a consequential sense, we might want to consider that maybe we don't even need (and the movement may not necessarily benefit from) the most innately evil people in the world going vegan.

Yeah, if he is outspoken about veganism, or makes clear that he is a psychopath and a sadist in debates about veganism, or something like that. Of course, the people who wouldn't want to go vegan based his personality would be making a fallacy from genetics, but unless they are made aware of that, it will damage their viewpoint of veganism, and therefore possibly the viewpoints of other people.

If he is a non-activist vegan, or does activism without showing his personality, I think it would be beneficial.