I figured that, by informing you that there's a really good website that searches for words/terms and actually finds the information you wanted, I was doing you a service. Now I don't have to expect another one of these threads from you, and you've learned how to use a search engine. We all win.

In fact, I am involved in the horse slaughter issue. I'm on the side that is contrary to yours, so rather than engage (because there's no amount of what you could say that would ever change my mind), I figured I'd just dump you your link and that would be the end of it.

The argument that I must be highly irritated to "[put] straight" every person I disagree with is right out. Take my BP - it's incredibly low. It really takes very little energy or effort to correct/inform someone. And I consider it informing, but that's another semantics issue.

Like I said before, I totally disagree with your point of view on this point, which is why I originally intended to reply with the information you wanted, even though you were clearly looking for a debate. You didn't like that. I'm not going into your point of view on the slaughter issue because it's pointless.

I'm sorry that Google doesn't filter out the nasty websites that offend your sensibility - I guess it's probably in the interest of balanced or alternative viewpoints. But if you Googled HR-503 in the last, oh, 48 hours, you would have gotten fficial&client=firefox-a">this link, where the second link is what you wanted. So, lucky you, you wouldn't have gotten horribly upset over it, and would have gotten your answer.

And that's really, really nice of you to allow me to save face in front of my, what is that, "cyberfriends"? I don't know a single person on this board. Few, if any, of my IRL friends/internet friends know of, or even read, this board, and for the most part, they'd largely disagree with me.

I'm sorry I didn't rise to your slaughter debate bait.