• Pilgrim@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    My question was how it’s illogical to you and your answer is “it’s completely illogical”?

    Like, how hard is it to write down a simple sentence in which you explain why it’s illogical!?

    I can do you a favour and already unfold it: The vegan argument is that unnecessary harm towards animals should be avoided when it’s “possible and practical”, like when you live in a modern society, you don’t need to buy leather clothes or eat meat, there is no necessity to do so because of the incredible amount of alternatives, where no animal needs to be killed nor harmed.

    To say thats illogical therefore means that you see no logic in avoiding unnecessary harm towards animals. So please, just start your response like this:

    “I don’t see how it’s logical that we should avoid unnecessary harm towards animals, because…”

    • FelixCress@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It is illogical to impose limitations on what humans can it, apart from perhaps health reasons (allergies etc.).

      Religions do that. You cannot eat pork/beef etc, depending on the religion. Vegans also do that and it is equally moronic.

      • Pilgrim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well, I made it simple for you and you still totally fail at responding to the point. So you just want to talk about limitations as if the reasons behind it are not relevant? By that logic, why do you limit yourself on eating pets? Why do you limit yourself on eating humans? I assume that the reason of why you don’t eat them are relevant? So why don’t you read once again which reason was giving for the circumstance that vegans don’t consume animal prodcuts

        If you fail to adress how the reason behind it is illogical, then I fear you’re not educated enough in terms of discussion and in terms of the topic that is discussed here.

        One last time: The reason why vegans stop consuming any animal products and why they don’t support any other kind of animal exploitation is that it’s not necessary, and if you’re against animal abuse, then you should ask yourself why you still pay for it.

        As I mentioned before, the whole vegan argument is about logic. I fear that your problem is not that you just can’t understand logic, it’s that you’re ignorant. You showed that very clearly by now

        Religions do that. You cannot eat pork/beef etc, depending on the religion. Vegans also do that and it is equally moronic.

        It would be hard to make a conclusion that is even more dumb than what you just said. Again, the reason of why vegans refuse to pay for any animal products is because they can easily buy alternatives which don’t involve the exploitation and killing of animals. It’s therefore not necessary to pay for animals to be harmed and killed. If there is no necessity for an animal to be harmed and killed, then paying for exactly that is in fact immoral.

        You don’t care about your own immoral actions, which is what many people do, but what makes you extraordinary “special” is how you try to make vegan look bad by preaching that their logic is flawed - while the reason that you state in regard to that are without any logic. The irony.

        The sad part is that, people like you are the ones that then claim vegans are bad people while all you do is to spread nonsense about them and leave toxic responses where you fail to discuss the main arguments in a constructive manner.

              • Pilgrim@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Sorry but I don’t see what you’re talking about. I explained in detail how you fail to respond to the core argument. Now you try to be a clown and I don’t have time for that. I thought there is a chance that you’d respond to the logic that you call flawed, but I see you won’t do that.

                It’s hard to admit that you’re wrong, I know that, but it’s better than refusing to listen to the arguments per se and to not learn anything (therefore continue to be stupid)

                If you choose the latter, do so, but don’t go on my nerves with these infantile responses. Don’t bother answering, you’re blocked