>i LOVE animals, im their biggest friend
>i-is that...an INSECTRINO?!!
>KILL IT! SQUASH IT!
>I ONLY LIKE ANIMALS AND THINK THEY ARE WORTHY OF LIFE IF THEY FIT MY STANDARDS FOR CUTENESS
>i LOVE animals, im their biggest friend. >i-is that...an INSECTRINO?!! >KILL IT!
have a nice day retarded contrarians
Me but with cats
I look like that but don't say that.
>haha yeah bro i freakin LOVE animals dude!!
>uhhhh.... nah bro i'm not vegan because... BACON XD
>*BRAAAAAAAPPPPPPPPFFTF*
try having bed bugs or carpet beetles in your bed and you wont be posting this anymore
it's ok to kill animals in self defence (or for food)
if it's ok to kill animals for food then it's ok to kill animals period
you wouldn't apply this retarded logic to humans: "it's ok to kill a man if you then eat him"
There's plenty of moral exceptions though, more people would agree it's ok to kill someone in self defense than the number who would agree it's ok to kill a random person.
Only a mouthbreather believes that
>quickly, painlessly killing an animal bred and raised specifically as a resource, and then using as much of their body as possible so nothing goes to waste
Is exactly the same as
>torturing an animal to a long, slow death
This is why no one likes you vegan tards.
>bred and raised specifically as a resource
I will never understand how NPCs think this is an argument
Wrong
Not all animals have the same vlaue and animals and humans do not have the same value
Because it is. Animals are not people. Whether they don't have souls, or they don't have the same relevance to your darwinian imperative. Their assigned purpose is all that matters.
from there you can reason that animal torture is not wrong because animals have a right not to be tortured, but because people who engage in animal torture have slightly less empathy than is normal and pose a risk to other humans, so they should be separated from the group, because the normal behavior of humans who are not dangerous is to kill their prey quickly rather than delighting in its prolonged suffering (as all mammals show the same behaviors for pain whether they have a consciousness or not).
the thing about arguing with vegans is they aren't capable of understanding that their morality is based on a fundamentally different pseudo-religious foundation and therefore there is no argument
there is conversion, but no argument, no debate because you can not debate between two somethings that are based on arbitrary and immaterial philosophy. it is religion. in the end there is nothing but the materialist who lives and the spiritualist who dies childless.
>Because it is
>IT JUST HECKIN' IS OKAY!!!!
animals do have souls anyway
>ALL ANIMALS HAVE SOULS BECAUSE THEY HECKIN DO OKAY
There are only two outcomes in morality from which true good and bad are derived
Those who are wealthy, healthy, alive, and with bountiful offspring
And those who are not.
Even heaven/hell and reincarnation are derived from these concepts. And the longest lived, most successful people on earth ate meat moderately, but not excessively, so
they also avoided animal torturers like the plague and weren't like that themselves because it reduces other peoples trust in you
it's like dog eaters - from a vegans "life is life, taking it is GOOD or BAD, nothing else!" moral standpoint, you can not eat a cow, but not a dog. period. it's hypocrisy. but from the materialists standpoint, eating the dog is bad because the dog is fewer resources than what went into it, and it is a material waste (and therefore poor evolutionary fitness) if the dog is not first used to recoup those resources, and then used to turn a profit, so eating the dog is only permitted when it ceases to be profitable - usually when the dog is dead or about to die anyways. how you define using the dog to produce more value than went into it depends on your lifestyle and situation, and how you evaluate the value that went into it (also dependent).
coincidentally, in the united states, many euthanized dogs are sent to rendering plants to become food for other dogs, and those that aren't just become fertilizer, while their lifelong mental illness reduction/crime reduction benefit is considered more valuable than the crap food that went into them.
>let me just make up my own retarded goal posts and then call those goal posts retarded
you're retarded
>bros, can live inside
spiders
house centipedes
>have to leave the house (I capture and release them outside)
ants
flies
>kill on sight
silverfish
mosquitoes
>ants
>capture and release
lol imagine thinking that works. They'll send another 10,000 ants to raid your house
nagger thread for naggers
at least use a picture of an animal for your Wauf bait thread homosexual
Rope yourself.
>>I ONLY LIKE ANIMALS AND THINK THEY ARE WORTHY OF LIFE IF THEY FIT MY STANDARDS FOR CUTENESS
Such is my will, I have decided so.
Why wouldn't just deciding that way be enough?
Do you have something that would be so absolute that it would invalidate such a thought?
No you don't. Nothing is above my conception of reality, and by posing such statement you pose yourself as a threat to my enjoyment of life. Do not make me have to eliminate you.
Bro thinks hes the joker
Insects which violate the NAP are a valid target for peacekeeping efforts.
>i LOVE animals, im their biggest friend
>i-is that...an INSECTRINO?!!
>KILL IT! SQUASH IT!
op btfo