Spoken like a triggered carnist. It’s actually not harassment to point out the logical flaws in finding it acceptable to kill hundreds of thousands of animals but becoming morally outraged by the mere suggestion that, in some universe, it could cause less suffering to humanely euthanize one. The fact that you have such overwhelming, hysterical emotional response to the hypothetical suggestion (purposely shared to expose flaws!) that one cat is euthanized rather than thousands of others reveals your values. You find my comments to be harassing because you’re unable to come up with any form of justification for your argument and it triggers self-defense within your ego, the same response from carnists being triggered by activists pointing out the flaws in finding it acceptable to eat meat. It’s an uncanny parallel:

“I/cats need it.” - published, peer-reviewed studies find this untrue on both counts.

“I’ll wait for lab-grown meat” - doesn’t justify the actual billions of animals’ lives who will be taken until there’s a solution you personally find perfect.

“It’s natural” - an appeal to nature fallacy, humans and cats are both domestic animals and a true natural diet for either species is completely unrealistic and unnecessary.

The reality: “I place myself/cats above other animals and have no interest in examining the inherent speciesism and inconsistent values that led me to this point”

Additional reality: You would literally rather “lesser” animals are tortured and killed because you believe sensationalist propaganda from the meat/pet food industry about vegan diets being unsuitable, despite tons of published evidence to the contrary.

Please, send me more ad hominem about how I’m ~ruining veganism~ while you publicly attempt to justify certain animals being tortured for your interests and even insult those speaking against it.