Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Someone is asking you to consider not supporting animal abuse, and you’re making the case that using electricity is comparably bad.

The arguments are exactly the same, despite your attempt to spin it.

The original argument was that a) eating meat is not necessary to human life, b) eating meat harms animals, c) therefore, you should stop eating meat.

My recasting of your argument is a) using electricity is not necessary to human life, b) using electricity harms animals, c) therefore, you should stop using electricity.

What is the difference between these arguments? Be specific.

And I don't really care if you "call me out". I don't bully. Sorry.



Nah mate, you’re on your own for that one. I hope you’ll dwell on it though and try to understand how that’s a very meaningless comparison.


In other words, you're conceding the point.

P.S. I'm not your "mate".




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: