TL;DR: Domesticated animals deserve death. More specifically, because they letting them live is “inhumane” because they won’t thrive without human influence—which they’re strictly against.
If you had not plugged your metaphorical ears and doubled down on an ad hominem, you would have seen that some of those receipts are self-reported filings from PETA themselves to the government.
I would link the definition of “ad hominem” for you, but let’s be real: you’re not going to read that either.
My friend, did you not see that they are employing “The Socratic Method”? Whoever calls Socratic method first wins, those are the rules, just like calling “shotgun” to claim the front car seat.
I’ve recently learned the /s sarcasm tag is a reddit thing. What’s the term for this though and is it allowed on Lemmy? “BrO, I aM uSiNg ThE sOcRaTic MeThOd. AnSwEr My QuEsTiOn, bRo.” It is a lot more tedious to type.
It’s an ad hominem to assert that I hold an unethical belief and then use said assertion to bolster your point.
I said PETA are psychopaths for needlessly killing animals, yet you assume that I’m not equally against killing animals for personal pleasure and consumerism.
No offense intended to vegetarians, but it’s a half measure if they’re doing it for ethical or climate reasons.
I genuinely do not care about that website; all that matters is their receipts. I care that PETA are hypocrites who needlessly kill living creatures while preaching about the ethics or lack thereof of needlessly killing living creatures.
https://petakillsanimals.com/
TL;DR: Domesticated animals deserve death. More specifically, because they letting them live is “inhumane” because they won’t thrive without human influence—which they’re strictly against.
IMO: These people are fucking psychopaths.
Great job falling for animal industry propaganda
https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/PETA_Kills_Animals
Have you stopped eating cows, chickens and pigs? If not, you, like PETA, believes they deserve death.
But do you have a non biased source not funded by the meat industry?
The website has receipts. Feel free to actually read them.
So… No, you don’t.
And like PETA, you also believe certain animals are deserving of death.
I don’t know, man, I think you might be a future member.
If you had not plugged your metaphorical ears and doubled down on an ad hominem, you would have seen that some of those receipts are self-reported filings from PETA themselves to the government.
I would link the definition of “ad hominem” for you, but let’s be real: you’re not going to read that either.
My friend, did you not see that they are employing “The Socratic Method”? Whoever calls Socratic method first wins, those are the rules, just like calling “shotgun” to claim the front car seat.
I’ve recently learned the /s sarcasm tag is a reddit thing. What’s the term for this though and is it allowed on Lemmy? “BrO, I aM uSiNg ThE sOcRaTic MeThOd. AnSwEr My QuEsTiOn, bRo.” It is a lot more tedious to type.
It is an ad hominem to point out that like PETA, you are responsible for the death of animals?
It’s an ad hominem to assert that I hold an unethical belief and then use said assertion to bolster your point.
I said PETA are psychopaths for needlessly killing animals, yet you assume that I’m not equally against killing animals for personal pleasure and consumerism.
Do you eat animals?
If so, that means you give money to animal murderers and that animals die for your benefit.
I apologize if you are vegetarian or vegan, but if so, when did you begin defending animal AG propaganda websites from being questioned?
No offense intended to vegetarians, but it’s a half measure if they’re doing it for ethical or climate reasons.
I genuinely do not care about that website; all that matters is their receipts. I care that PETA are hypocrites who needlessly kill living creatures while preaching about the ethics or lack thereof of needlessly killing living creatures.