RAW-FOOD Archives

Raw Food Diet Support List

RAW-FOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Thomas E. Billings" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Raw Food Diet Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 11 Dec 1998 09:25:04 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (46 lines)
>>"Thomas E. Billings" wrote:
>> A cooked food consumer who teaches that other groups of people are
>> "mutants" or "inferior", is a bigot. A fruitarian/raw foods advocate who
>> teaches that cooked food consumers are mutants or inferior, is "passionate".

Rex Harrill <[log in to unmask]>
>I love humor, but sometimes have to admit I 'don't get it.'  The second sentence
>of this paragraph I got as a spoof.  The first is puzzling because it's so
>obviously true---the cooked consumer would quality as a bigot in anyone's book.
>Help me out, here.

Tom:
The second sentence is not a spoof. There really are fruitarians who say
cooked fooders are mutants/inferior. The excuse their supporters make
is that the miscreants are "passionate". [Are they "passionate bigots"?
:-) :-( ].

>>"Thomas E. Billings" wrote:
>> A cooked food scientist who claims that "fruit is just like Mother's
>> milk", "humans evolved as strict fruitarians" would be considered
>> a lunatic or a crackpot. A raw fooder who promotes the same, will
>> likely consider himself/herself a "scientific genius".

Rex Harrill <[log in to unmask]>
>Why would a fringe group dispute *anybody* who said "fruit is just like..." or
>"humans evolved as..."?  Isn't that their so-called party line?

Tom:
Once again, the analogies I made are real. They are not intended as humor,
though they are funny - in a sick kind of way. Fringe groups do indeed
promote crackpot, invalid theories like the ones identified above.

Rex Harrill <[log in to unmask]>
>I hate to be dense, but I really can't figure these two instances out.  OTOH, if
>this post, and the one before, are private humor, because of a private agenda,
>why not send them privately?  Obviously, the preceding post is so blatantly
>pro-cook propaganda that it might cause an unwary new reader to think that such
>as Pottenger's Cats thrived on cooked food, rather than dying out.

Tom:
See above; it is not humor. I am simply presenting analogies to encourage
folks in the raw community to critically evaluate the "party line"
and the behavior of those who promote it.

Tom Billings

ATOM RSS1 RSS2