sandinista wrote:Parting explanation...I was simply responding to this, one in a long line of delirious posts, made by coito.
Coito ergo sum wrote:Not libertarian. Just a liberal republic that protects fundamental liberties in large measure, rather than an authoritarian regime that governs and nitpicks every aspect of our lives. You like the latter, I prefer the former. Got it. I must have missed the part about the "harm" eating Big Macs, speaking one's mind, and having abortions does to "others." But, I'm sure you'll provide a clear explanation of that.
You may have "missed the part about the harm caused by eating mcshit burgers". I have clearly pointed out the harm. Provided a clear explanation (which is what you asked for). Again, you are so ideologically committed, like most fanatics, that you, after seeing evidence to the contrary, still "miss the part". Big shocker there.
You pointed out the supposed "harm" of eating meat, not Big Macs qua Big Macs. Your rationale applies to burgers made at home on the grill just as much as it applies to Big Macs. And, your logic applies to all agriculture. The only way to eliminate the "harm" you alleged is for humans to stop eating.
You pointed out your alleged harm after I made the inquiry. When I made the statement you just quoted, you had not claimed that you were alleging some generalized "harm" to the ecosystem. Naturally, being a liar, you pretend to have clearly articulated your answer before I made the inquiry.
I'm not a fanatic - I'm not the one suggesting that humans shouldn't eat because of the harm that they do to the ecosystem. Only a true fanatic like yourself could make that argument. You also bootstrap your "agriculture is harmful to the world" argument and apply it selectively against your chosen enemy, McDonalds. You claim McDonalds is the culprit when you know darn well, or ought to know, that your argument would apply just as well to the family farmer and the organic farmer or livestock producer.