RhysB wrote:
Kameltin wrote:
RhysB wrote:
80% vegas are attention seeker that probably will lose in an argument
This comment shows your lacking ability to think rationally, really.
a) You can't extrapolate like that.
b) As this thread shows, "meat eaters" aren't any better in that sense, comments like "more meat for me" are stupid.
c) Veganism isn't just a lifestyle - trend. Most vegans are vegans because of a moral view.
And ethially there is no tradition (deontology, teleology etc) at all that says the consumption of meat is ok. But sure, go discuss with me if you're that confident in winning.
Why are you trying to make me argue about stuff I did not mention? This is exactly why vegans are assholes who don't understand that the human body doesn't digest everything equally, they also force that close minded thinking to other people thus receding the human race (thus the 20% which is not "retarded"). Side note, no one gives a fuck about you being a vegan, don't go around screaming it. Vegetarians > Vegans
Have i ever implied that im a vegan? Because im not.
Doesnt mean i cant argue for vegans.
You mentioned that 80% can't argue, i mentioned that you cant and said you should discuss about it if you feel so confident.
And how well we can digest certain food is irrelevant considering there is moral factors that matter more.
You wouldn't say eating human flesh is "ok" or "good" because you can digest it well.
You make a really simple mistake, you cannot transition from facts to oughts.
That we can digest flesh better might be true, you cant use it as argument for something normative.
(-David Hume)