This is sick

Stories

Diaries

Polls

Users

Web Adequacy.org

Home

About

Topics

Rejects

Abortions

This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.

Poll

Votes: 23

This is sick

Author:

Fon2d2

Topic:

Diaries

Posted:

May 01, 2002

Comments:

A vegan couple refuses to feed their baby breast milk or bottle formula until it is malnourished to the brink of death.

More diaries by Fon2d2

Well, K5 is dying

See here. The baby is seriously half the weight of other babies its age after about 4 or 5 months in foster care. Not mentioned in the story is that the father during a recent visitation mentioned that the baby looks fat.

	When veganism becomes a crime... (none / 0) (#1)
	by elenchos on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 12:44:13 PM PST

	...only criminals will be vegan. I do, I do, I do --Bikini Kill

	What does that mean? (none / 0) (#5)
	by majubma on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 01:45:57 PM PST

	It's tautologial. -- All information wants to be free, especially information about what you do in the privacy of your own home.

	Hey majubma... (none / 0) (#12)
	by Illiterate Bum on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 11:14:05 PM PST

	Care to clarify where your sig. came from? Obviously it's referring to Adequacy, but I can't remember if I saw that particular statement here or if I saw a variation of it somewhere else. If that statement was from here, it'd be great if you could direct me to the article (I do remember laughing my ass off reading it, and am far too lazy to search for it myself). Otherwise, I'm afraid that I'm going to have to notify our local Copyright Watchdog. The curiosity is slowly killing me. ----- "...normal, balanced people do not waste time posting to weblogs." --tkatchev

	You're better off not knowing. (none / 0) (#16)
	by because it isnt on Thu May 2nd, 2002 at 03:43:35 AM PST

	It's the "Underpant Gnomes" from South Park. Obviously, it's a satirisation of dot-com companies with no viable business plan, but being South Park, it has to get back to toilet humour somehow. adequacy.org -- because it isn't

	Deluded Godless souls (5.00 / 1) (#2)
	by Adam Rightmann on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 12:55:17 PM PST

	God made animals to serve man's needs, which includes eating them. If He didn't want us to eat a cute, fluffy lamb, why did he make it taste so good? A. Rightmann

	I thought God made the Lamb... (none / 0) (#6)
	by elenchos on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 02:56:36 PM PST

	...to walk the earth among us and to sacrifice Himself to atone for our sins? Not to munch down on his flesh to sate your fallen hunger for animal flesh. You'd think a Christian would at least try to return to the state of grace we enjoyed before Original Sin. I do, I do, I do --Bikini Kill

	Deletion Notice (none / 0) (#7)
	by RobotSlave on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 04:09:04 PM PST

	A comment by user "The Mad Scientist" entitled "Maybe I'm [redacted], but..." was deleted for violation of copyright held by user "Adam Rightmann." The Original content from the deleted comment is republished below: "If He didn't want us to make sex all the time why did he make it feel so good? If you will answer with "temptation", doesn't it apply to lambs too?" © 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

	phew (none / 0) (#10)
	by anti filidor on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 08:08:20 PM PST

	Luckily this joke is exactly the same every time, so it does not run the risk of ceasing to be uproariously funny.

	Joke? (none / 0) (#15)
	by RobotSlave on Thu May 2nd, 2002 at 12:49:26 AM PST

	This is no joke. One of the bastions of modern civilisation is under attack, and you call the effort to save it a "joke?" Please, take your barbaric howlings elsewhere. The Adeqacy is no place for the uncivilised. © 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

	Thank you (none / 0) (#28)
	by anti filidor on Sat May 4th, 2002 at 12:46:06 PM PST

	for staying in character. It will be a sad day when this jocundity stops.

	Pardon me (none / 0) (#23)
	by budlite on Sat May 4th, 2002 at 08:38:15 AM PST

	But aren't you just as guilty by republishing the original content yet again?

	Obviously... (none / 0) (#25)
	by The Mad Scientist on Sat May 4th, 2002 at 09:38:14 AM PST

	...no. He defines himsef as being on the "right" side, so apparently he applies different set of rules to his posts.

	Obviously (none / 0) (#27)
	by RobotSlave on Sat May 4th, 2002 at 12:29:56 PM PST

	You fail to grasp the distinction between a reader submitting work for publication at Adequacy, and an editor choosing to publish said material, in whole or in part. This is not about being on the "right" side. This is about acting as a publisher rather than an author. © 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

	hurf burf duh! (none / 0) (#26)
	by nathan on Sat May 4th, 2002 at 09:46:54 AM PST

	The post in question was not deleted for having original content. It was deleted for abusing someone else's copyright. [ cocksucking ] Reposting the original content of the message, properly attributed, is not a violation of copyright. For one thing, it does not violate the intent of the original poster, because had he not wanted the original content published, he never would have posted it. [ dicklicking ] HLUGHLGULGHGLUHLGUHLUG Nathan -- Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

	These `vegans' are stupid. (none / 0) (#3)
	by Anonymous Reader on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 01:13:41 PM PST

	Human breast milk is vegan.

	nonsense (none / 0) (#9)
	by John Milton on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 07:59:54 PM PST

	The world will be truly free of animal exploitation once we get all those calves off their teats. We do say that it is wrong for man to exploit the insensate beast, but why do we not hold animals accountable for their actions. Cannabalism is immoral no matter what the species. -John Milton

	Stupid artists... (none / 0) (#8)
	by gNinja on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 05:49:51 PM PST

	The real culprit is modern art. Unlike earlier religious art, modern art teaches that the artist is a mini-diety who creates his own world and doesn't have to live by the same rules as ordinary people. New artists aren't supposed to draw things that make sense. If a modern artist paints a farm scene, he feels compelled to make all the cows purple. You have never seen preening until you ask an artist if he is on drugs. For an artist that is the highest form of flattery. Modern art forbids all forms of happiness or pleasure but elevates the sick, depraved and mentally ill. Probably this artist thought he was using his child as to make a statement. And when people told him that he was harming the baby he refused to listen because those people just didn't "understand." It's high time we criminalized modern art. Only then, will society be safe.

	A classic rhetorical question. (none / 0) (#11)
	by First Incision on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 09:51:57 PM PST

	Who was the first human to see a calf suckling at the teat of a cow and say "I want some of that too!" ? _ _ Do you suffer from late-night hacking? Ask your doctor about Protonix.

	Forget the cows... (none / 0) (#20)
	by hauntedattics on Thu May 2nd, 2002 at 12:07:47 PM PST

	I'm still wondering who thought lobster might be good to eat. So I can thank them, of course.

	I'd suggest... (none / 0) (#21)
	by The Mad Scientist on Thu May 2nd, 2002 at 12:30:19 PM PST

	...to hold a minute of silence for the nameless heroes, who sacrificed themselves in experimentally proving that things like deadly nightshade aren't good to eat. I suppose that what's good to eat was being determined by trial and error; otherwise I can't explain why someone would get the idea about eating ie. snails.

	Yes (none / 0) (#22)
	by First Incision on Fri May 3rd, 2002 at 01:54:36 PM PST

	It is generally accepted that the safety and basic unsafety of most items was discovered by babies. Why? Because they go around putting anything and everything in their mouths. Of course, this is one of those claims that makes logical sense, but doesn't really have any proof to back it up. _ _ Do you suffer from late-night hacking? Ask your doctor about Protonix.

	*(Arching one eyebrow)* (3.00 / 1) (#13)
	by Illiterate Bum on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 11:29:42 PM PST

	Well, I guess their dedication to their beliefs is admirable... (fearing for continuing survival of human race) A bit off topic, but does anyone else think it's kinda funny that there are so many vegetarian foods that try and taste like meat? Maybe it's because so many vegans and vegetarians are of the "hip artist" variety? They might do it intentionally for the irony. ----- "...normal, balanced people do not waste time posting to weblogs." --tkatchev

	Well.. (none / 0) (#14)
	by DG on Thu May 2nd, 2002 at 12:11:46 AM PST

	one of the reasons why they make them taste like meat is becuse some times you just can't take eating veggies anymore, so they make food like that.. can't stand it personally, i like a good steak every once in a while © 2002, DG. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

	Simple. (3.00 / 1) (#17)
	by because it isnt on Thu May 2nd, 2002 at 03:49:03 AM PST

	Vegetarian foods pretend to be meat for the same reason Linux desktops look like Microsoft Windows. They're trying, badly, to get the meat eaters to switch over to their ideology by pretending that they can still eat "meat". adequacy.org -- because it isn't

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.