Search results

Bacteria are not sentient feeling beings. They cannot experience pain or suffer and have no cognitive abilities. To equate them with animals is just dumb. Also, consuming water is necessary - consuming animal products isn't. And even if bacteria, plants, or whatever could suffer, veganism would...

It's not productive or intellectually honest to dismiss ideas on the basis you don't want to take responsibility and change or believe them.

You don't live in the middle of nowhere, mate. You eat for pleasure, not for survival. Sure, morality may be subjective but if you care about animals and the planet, then veganism is the only morally consistent way.

You don't need animal products to make gains. Plenty world renown vegan athletes. http://www.greatveganathletes.com/ I encourage you to take a critical look at your eating habits rather than dismissing it so easily with a joke. [hr] Do you not have an argument of your own?

Just to be blunt but rape, murder and war are natural, too. That doesn't mean it's morally okay. I don't think there's anything natural about breeding several artificially selected species by the billions and raising them in captivity their whole life so we can consume them for pleasure...

Animals either matter morally or they do not matter morally. If they do not matter morally, then we have no moral obligations to treat them with concern or care. If they do matter morally, then we owe it to them at the very least to not inflict suffering or death upon them in the absence...

Yeah, I got in everyone's in face about it whenever they ate it in front me the first couple of weeks but I realized that wasn't very productive. I mean I'm still aggressive about veganism but it's more strategically planned now. Lol, yeah. There's a lot of mindless bacon trolls out there...

I went vegan for the ethics primarily, however, for the environment as well. Health was just a bonus. If animals morally matter, then at the very least we owe it to them to not inflict suffering and death without a compelling reason. Pleasure cannot constituent a compelling reason to harm...

How can you possibly say that? You haven't. You have to be completely dishonest to say that. You are lying. You NEVER provided a refutation to those arguments. NEVER. I'm completely dumbfounded how people are taking you seriously and aren't laughing at you for being a total dumbass. Move past...

You are either incredibly intellectually dishonest or genuinely fucking retarded. I have the utmost contempt for shits like you who talk the talk but won't walk the walk. If you're going to call me out for being wrong and make a bigg deal out of it by making a thread just for it rather than...

Someone junk this, please. Wrong section.

I've been waiting for the bans list to come back for a while. I had no clue people couldn't even junk threads. That's pretty dumb.

Oh my God. Are you being serious? Did you not even read his reply? He completely dismissed me and refused to address my arguments.

It wasn't. That's why I left Junior year of high school. I still hold it has one of the best decisions I've ever made.

No, it was not addressed in the OP. Are you fucking kidding me? Don't act like you pride yourself in argument and truth when you're too much of a pussy to address me, you pathetic coward. You're the one who's the epitome of hypocrisy. I'm insulting them because they're being complete...

How am I suppose to respond to this? Holy shit. I'm totally speechless as I type this. I got you so mad and butt-hurt you had to make a thread attempting to "expose" me? Holy fucking shit. This is top tier cringe. 1.) I never said I disagreed with the position that desire is marker of sexual...

I expect more from you because you typically aren't a blithering idiot. You're typically fairly rational but right now it seems like you lost your mind. No, I can tell you your opinion and what you believe is wrong. I'm using our current understanding of sexuality. If you got an argument that...

Oh my God, Chill. I expect so much better from you. I've addressed everyone who's posed a question. That's simply just not true. Yeah, you can suck and fuck as many dudes as you and identify as straight. This is part of gender fluidity. Your gender identity is determined by you.  Lol...

Lol, no. That has no scientific basis at all. It's not boys, girls or both. We know sexuality is fluid. People can't be 100% straight or homosexual because there are unavoidable environmental factors. And in our sexual fluidity, we are essentially bisexuals by traditional sense of the...

I already said multiple times that finding someone good looking doesn't necessarily equate to sexual attraction. My argument is that in sexual fluidity we are all essentially bisexuals because 100% straight or homosexual simply isn't possible because of unavoidable factors.