debate

@yaasshat I'm not saying your wrong. The rate of growth is definitely slowing down. But the population itself is still growing... Not that this really matters at all to either of us... but hey... here's a lovely chart for you to look at. http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/world_population_1900_to_2050.jpg lol.. Judging by this chart it's looks like it's almost entirely India's fault. Someone needs to go introduce them to planned parenthood. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Net_Population_Growth_in_2016.svg/1200px-Net_Population_Growth_in_2016.svg.png

Okay after a shitload of College, and getting rid of a bug, Back to the Debate. @Lamby. 1. There are two kinds of Cholesterol as I stated before. It's not about a specific amount, while of course to degree it is, that goes with everything. I already showed a link prior about it. While stating most people in general aren't vegans is a fair point. It's literally athletes job's to be on the top of the physical spectrum, they have the Top Nutritionist on the planet helping them and changing their diets for the best possible physical outcome. This is their job, and while veganism is greatly popular, you can bet your ass they've heard of it, and would bring it up if it were truly as "Only superior" as many try to say it is. That said, we can agree on the fact that, what is popular and good, are two entirely different things. 2. Consciousness and Sentience are two entirely different things. Also it takes far more than just a few studies for something to be treated as a true scientific theory and treated as fact. And I heavily doubt it's legitimacy when it says "All" mammals and birds. That is a very, Very broad spectrum with incredible differences between intelligence among them. I already stated multiple animals(Including Octopi) that I believe are sentient. That doesn't mean I believe the Turkeys are. 3.The people who butcher animals have job, the people driving the food and animals to their destinations have jobs, the people who own the ranches the animals are born at have jobs, and many, Many more. You don't think that wouldn't put countless thousand out of work? Slavery also was questioned on whether they should end or not due to putting slaves out without any homes or jobs, and increase prices. Just because it may seem bad doesn't make it okay to continue. You can use a free, public computer for work. Staying connected with people can be as simple as legitimately talking to them in person, or again, at a public computer if necessary. So, it's convenience on both of those. So convenience and fun. Which isn't much of an argument against taste, convenience, and health of eating meat. The things I do keeps people employed while hurting arguably sentient beings, While the things you do is cause the suffering confirmed sentient beings. 4. Suffering is a part of life, Not experiencing suffering isn't a right. At most it's a privilege, and one, no gets. I stated, being loved by someone, does not give you human rights. Which it doesn't, because if you kill a random toddler on the street who had no one, it'd still be consider manslaughter. Emotional weight does not give you rights. I never said that losing a dog is the equivalent of losing a child. I stated just because you care about something doesn't give it value under the law. Which it doesn't. Stop misinterpreting what I'm saying. Maternal Instinct is exactly what it sounds like. You don't need to describe common biology that is held by most animals on the planet. That's very true, but we're going scientifically and lawfully here. I already said personally I'm against it entirely. It's not hypocrisy. It's called understanding how our laws work. Lawfully, you don't have rights until you are alive, just like you don't have rights when you are dead. Meaning kids don't got no rights when they ain't alive. Meaning once they are, they do. Meaning 5-6 weeks they are alive and should have their rights. 5. I already responded to that before. No I don't agree with the overall industry. I just don't have the money nor means to not use it for now while keeping my present lifestyle. You can only kill something so humanely, a shot in the head is as painless as they come. Again, Unnecessary suffering is unnecessary. Kill them quickly and cleanly when always possible. That's my stance on that, I won't repeat the paragraph I wrote before on it. Crows are one of the smartest animals on the planet, known to use tools even. I could easily see them as sentient, But just because one animal is, doesn't make another. It's the fact humans experience PTSD due to their own actions, that they understand what thy are doing and the ramifications both before and after them, unlike most animals. Another plain of sentience, at that point they'd be what I imagine a God would be. So sure. If they're doing it, they obviously understand that w're insignificant enough it wouldn't matter either way, or they wouldn't do it. They would have an understanding of time and space in ways couldn't imagine, and that's IF a higher level of sentience were even possible. But yeah, going under that realm of talk, Who am I to disagree with a fucking God, who understands me, and my kind more than I do. I wouldn't accept of course and die fighting, But, we are only human in the end after all.

@Wes, (Abortion comment) To be fair, do we have the right to end someone's life because they're homeless, or due to horrible diseases they already have? Do we have the right to end someone's life just because we don't specifically think it's a happy one? The answers no. And I think we can all agree if the person wants out after they're alive, they can always do it themselves. If no family takes care of them, the system exists, and while it may not be pleasant, many do come out of it well, and it should be their decision on whether they want to continue living in that life. Just because she makes ya, doesn't give your mom the right to shoot you in the head because you have depression. While the population is growing, it's not in places where safe abortion is even possible. America for example is on a negative birthrate, which in the long run will cause our country to collapse. We don't have the right to kill people just because our resources are finite either. So, realistically speaking, it should be the same for children. Adoption. They don't need to be parents at all. You are correct on their being no "best answer", Abortion is tricky. However, you could say that about a lot of crimes also. It's good to think on both sides of the spectrum however, so you don't stay in an echo chamber.

millennials... *sigh @Leo the Wolf "to be fair" that's where you lost... Life isn't fair. The world isn't fair. Fair doesn't figure in anywhere.

@Cheeto That is some beautiful optimism. Hugs you all. I'm out.

I think humans will eventually do themselves in, in the end. I kind of hope we get killed by an asteroid instead or a solar flare. That might be a quicker way to die than loss of resources and the like.

right, ofcourse, if it's dangerous for the mother then yes i would definitely be pro-abortion i don't agree with part of enki her statement "especially if the baby has down syndrome". that seems kind of.. well, rude? just because they have down syndrome they don't get a chance at life?