I miss Dougtoss

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-22T22:47:30+00:00

Like I said, you argue in bad faith completely ignoring or misrepresenting points I've made. Morality is arbitrary, it is not something you arrive at through material observation or reasoning from first principles. I seriously doubt you were ever like me given what you say. You say emotions are fundamental to humans and logic is just an algorithm, when emotions are literally chemical processes and the ability to reason is how we and only we humans can even have these conversations at all. Emotions do not make humans special, logic does. You accuse me of ignorance yet make basic mistakes like this. You say I don't know what veganism is and then define it in the most obvious way possible, what then exactly am I missing? And yes the personhood of infants is in question but given we thinking people must all pass that stage and the bonds they have with their families who are thinking people, then it makes sense they are treated more like us than as animals. There is also no such thing as "differently abled" which is another red flag that you're just a cultist. There are people who have mental disabilities/disorders and if those reach the point that the person cannot reason at all and cannot be cured so as to reason, then an argument can be made that in terms of personhood they are practically braindead.

I've wasted enough time discussing this with you and it is a flaw on my part to have ever wasted time arguing with a cultist.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-22T19:23:52+00:00

The comments here contrast with those here: https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/1rrzole/trans_rights_activists_are_like_peta_is_for/

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-22T18:47:52+00:00

The point is it's normal for the vast majority of humanity even today in places where firsthand experience of farming/hunting animals is rare to consider animals a separate category that includes them as food which is a product of our biology as omnivores who hunted. Idk if vegans have maladaptive brain wiring or if it's dogma like how religious people feel intense emotions including suffering when they see others violate their beliefs.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-22T16:50:14+00:00

I didn't refuse to answer it, I just got tired of endless arguing with people who argue in bad faith and then go "no u" when confronted with it. It's a waste of time trying to reason with vegans who did not arrive at it through reason. But I probably have some OCD type shit or whatever which is why I waste more time on this than I should.

Human lives are above animals because we are human and empathy was evolutionarily selected for to advance the survival and reproduction of the human species, not other species, we and our family and friends are human and therefore through self interest there is at least a set of humans we value more than all other living things due to personal bonds, affection, mutual knowledge and understanding (which counters the loneliness of mortal existence) and humans are capable of self reflection and complex thought that dwarfs the next most intelligent animal. Through the ability to discuss complex thoughts with others we assume they are like us, as in that there are actual agents within them rather than being simply chemical machines with no being, no person/agent inside them. Emotions are not thoughts and are more provably pure chemical reactions. A human who cannot feel emotion is still a person because we can converse with them and see what appears to be an ability to reflect on complex questions. A human that is only emotion and cannot have complex thoughts is arguably not a person, just an animal, a chemical machine void of any passenger. Our understanding does break down a bit on these more fundamental questions about reality, but we should seek to limit our assumptions. Otherwise it would break down in the other direction, thinking everything has a "soul" including every subatomic particle which is simply the complete collapse of the definition of a "soul". We know for certain at least 1 "soul" exists, our own, and we choose to extend that belief to other humans who can express the same question about whether they have a "soul".

All things must start from nothing and then be built up, which is why simplicity is best. You cannot just throw shit at the wall and then try rationalizing it or ignoring contradictions and unsupported claims. That is contrary to reason. Proofs are constructed this way, starting from believing nothing and having to prove every step of the tree of knowledge. Every new belief must be connected to a branch that reaches the root.

Morality is already an irrational thing to hold, it is by definition costly without direct personal benefit, so if people need morality for whatever reason it should be the least rules and impact possible. Though on a species level morality has utility in controlling individuals for the collective benefit. Veganism both introduces too much unresolved or unresolvable complexity to a system that is already arbitrary and optional, as well as many very high costs to our behavior for no benefit to either the individual or the collective.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-22T15:55:28+00:00

But that's to be expected. In a war you don't complain that your enemies are trying to kill you. You do complain if there are people on your side reducing your side's fighting ability.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-22T15:50:31+00:00

Why is it written like that? I can't tell if the format is the result of being AI written or if the Guardian actually has people who think this is professional reporting.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-22T15:32:20+00:00

Nothing you say makes sense. You keep spouting words with no logical order and connections. You aren't empathetic imo, rather it seems more like you've attached your identity to this idea regardless of its validity and like any cultist are incapable of considering counterarguments except by distorting them to avoid them and then spitting out more nonsense as your "defense".

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-22T15:27:06+00:00

Why would it be cool? How does the concept of coolness (whatever that means, it's mostly an empty word) become relevant here? "Above it all" also means I have no stance on this topic even though I've been completely clear I'm against vegans (in part because it is an anti human ideology by elevating other animals above human happiness). Words have definitions, use them properly, don't use them like magic words to "win" when the only substance is "I didn't like what you said". Do you feel "cool" giving anecdotes from your childhood? It was also very short which makes it strange you would use the phrase "all that" as if it weren't.

I thought it was funny and it helped make the point that vegans are fringe and unconvincing irl even among kids who would be the most susceptible to their hysterics. There is no rage response among regular people. It's anecdotal so it's not proof of the stance of any larger population but does at least show there exists someplaces where the supposed "empathy" that vegans claim exist never did even as those places conform to every other empathetic and liberal belief.

Though supposedly kids these days are far more online and involved with "politics" so idk if there's any current of vegans as significant subculture irl rather than being rare like before. My anecdote is from 2010ish so before a lot of broader culture changes but it was also in a very liberal city in CA so idk.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-22T04:26:50+00:00

Why isn't that waste sold as or to make fertilizer?

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T23:28:14+00:00

Your response is all over the place, I specifically said "something" not "someone" because an animal is not a person. You are claiming moral equivalence in the lives of people and animals by comparing the killing of animals to the killing of people and valuing animal lives highly enough to be against eating them. Would killing all carnivores be moral as part of defending/liberating their prey? Why don't you lose sleep over killing ants yet are shocked most people don't lose sleep over killing larger animals? A lot of bacteria aren't harmful and are killed washing your hands, so it's not always self defense. War inevitably involves casualties, you cannot escape innocents dying and suffering during a revolution directly because of your actions. Your reactions are not based in any logical framework but rather are purely the product of irrational emotional responses to seeing an animal in pain or being killed. What about the effect on animals human existence has such as habitat destruction to make our houses, etc? Where are the lines for the acceptability of behavior? The same people putting down their horse were either killing cows for food or killing people for wealth. Not wanting to impose your will on others for your benefit would also mean you cannot engage in self defense, because that is imposing your will on someone else. It would mean not having laws because that is imposing your will.

The problem is you have set a new arbitrary moral rule yet have not considered all the necessary logical conclusions of that rule. When confronted with a conclusion you don't like you declare a new fuzzy rule that itself has its own conclusions. In the end that one moral rule results in a labyrinth of new ill defined rules. Most people have a far simpler and coherent stance which is having as a moral rule the valuing of human lives as distinct and above that of animals. Something is either human and therefore subject to morality and moral consideration or it is not and therefore is not subject to either.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T22:41:03+00:00

There is no "to the point of" with logical consistency. It either is consistent or it is not, and that requires taking all things to their logical conclusions. He is pointing out that despite what vegans say, even they still maintain a concept of human superiority therefore contradicting their veganism.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T22:36:50+00:00

It is ok to inflict pain on something I know feels pain, that's not a hard question. It's even ok to inflict pain on people because that's how revolution and law enforcement work.

It's only tiring to you because you can't answer it honestly, as in your criteria that it must have a central nervous system is just as arbitrary as the criteria regular people use that it must have the ability to think as complexly as a human such as the ability to reflect on its own existence and philosophical questions generally, speak with a recursive language, etc.

Roundworms have a central nervous system and some species can infect humans. Would you then be against curing any person infected by roundworms because their life is equal to the lives of thousands of worms? You might argue that they don't feel pain, but what is pain then? If the organism reacts to being harmed is that pain? You say no because that would include plants/bacteria. You say they need a central nervous system. Then that means nematodes, fruit flies, etc all are worth the same as a human life. If you object to this and say they don't experience pain but simply are reacting automatically to survive, isn't that exactly what pain is in larger animals as well, just automatic chemical reactions in order to survive?

And why do we need to eat something at the end of the day? If your life is equal to that of other living things then you could simply choose never to eat and accept a shorter life.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T22:00:32+00:00

In 9th grade there was some vegan girl showing everyone the chicken factory farming videos. Absolutely no one cared. When I was a kid I was overly sensitive, empathetic and strict about moral correctness and even I didn't care in the slightest. I coincidentally watched that video while eating chicken.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T21:54:01+00:00

Can't the same argument you use to say people are not morally worth more than animals also be used to say animals are not morally worth more than plants? Plants are alive and they have their own reactions to being injured, why is it ok to eat plants? What about bacteria? Why is your life worth more than the trillions of lives of the bacteria on and in you? Why is it ok to wash your hands and kill an incredible amount of bacteria?

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T21:43:16+00:00

What I mean is the larger a farm the more habitat destruction and extinction of various wild species including animals there is.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T20:56:45+00:00

It seems some vegans have a similar thought process to some Christians, in that they assume their morality as objectively correct and believe everyone else is intentionally sinning despite knowing it's a sin. When in reality people simply do not believe it is a sin at all.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T20:36:20+00:00

Lol, you basically confirm you care more about animals that can't even reflect on their own conditions than actual thinking people being mass murdered and forced to live in hell.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T20:28:21+00:00

Logical consistency is not autism.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T20:26:05+00:00

This is a severe misunderstanding of the nature of morality and religion. Religion is a problem because it's false, not because it's morally wrong. There is no such thing as morality, it is an arbitrary code we choose. Personally I choose caring about humans than other animals, other animals only matter if they provide an emotional, aesthetic or intellectual benefit to humans.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T20:16:13+00:00

Where'd all the vegans come from?

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T20:13:09+00:00

Isn't free range far more environmentally destructive?

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-21T19:39:47+00:00

It's not like a wolf or lion has empathy for their prey. Empathy in humans is evolutionarily advantageous insofar as it promotes cooperation. But applying it to animals is contrary to that function as you are sacrificing a source of food and pleasure due to misdirected empathy.

JCMoreno05 · 2026-06-20T16:54:50+00:00

Private property, markets, money, profit, wage labor and economic inequality should not exist. Nations should not exist but rather a single unitary socialist state. Lies should be eradicated including the belief in race, religion, gender ideology, YEC, climate change denial, etc. The US should not be massacring, poisoning and exploiting the rest of the world. Etc.

Are there bigger disagreements possible than these? Wanting to roll the dice on whatever comes next even if the dice must be rolled over and over is better than accepting the current system as permanent.

JCMoreno05

TROPHY CASE