debate

You won't force your values on a pregnant woman but you will force your values on any human who goes against your arbitrary and inconsistent "rules" for when it is acceptable or not to take another creature's life for sustenance and what methods are used? Once again you've showed your complete logical inconsistency. Like holy hell I knew you weren't usually that bright but you're outdoing yourself today. So let me get this straight...... you actually view abortion as murder but you will advocate for a pregnant woman to choose (even if medically unnecessary) to in what even you view as murder a human (or something that will become human) with sentience and the ability to feel pain. Like why does a pregnant woman get a pass on the whole "right to life" concept but every other scenario a human isn't? It isn't your life that is affected by me choosing to eat a hamburger (regardless of how that meat was processed and the methods used to kill the cow and process that meat). So why are you picking such a strong bone with this but are totally okay with what even you think is murder of a human (or in general LIFE). I literally cannot respect your views on either topic because when you argue for one (veganism and abortion) your views completely contradict themselves. Your views are so arbitrary and there is no consistency in your arguments. Your whole central point on your veganism is this "right to life" that is sacred above all else but on abortion that "right to life" is ..... not above all else .... why? I'm going to pull a you ... Either there is a right to life or there is not - which is it? Yes or no question either ... YES there is a right to life - or - NO there is no inherent right to life Be logically consistent either tell both the pregnant woman and the meat lover that their choices are wrong and cruel and violate the "right to life" or tell neither. You argue right to life of animals as fiercely as evangelical christians argue right to life in the womb.

humans know we die ( some animals know they will dies though) so we know that in a way nothing matters and we will eat things that are better to not eat like top roman or a gmo apple. we will drive cars that kill us from the gas coming out the exhaust pipe. we have emotion so we think we need to eat bad food and breath bad air so the future kids can live better.

humans can have different points of view political and moral now, should eating meat be illegal? id say no thats my political view would i eat meat? no, thats my moral view see? simple this isnt an abortion debate either, we can have that later

so humans have rights over animals because.... nihilism >w>? well thats new ill give ya that >w>

She has endurance and passion but those alone as anybody can see do not translate into success or actual good arguments. It doesn't matter which trait (intelligence or strength or whatever) since the greater concept here is right to life - which you yourself can't even be consistent on. I don't have to provide a basis with arguments as riddled with holes and contradictions as yours are. In trying to make complex issues with nuance black and white - you miss a lot of good points and really limit your mind. I can entertain you further once you're able to be consistent with your own beliefs.

if a baby in a woman's stomach was going to kill her, id want the baby out if a cow was killing a man, id shoot the cow dead pretty cut and dry? laff so if an alien race came to earth and farmed us like cattle itd be fine cause they have bigger guns?