A torrent of water, if you will.

Well that was condescending and not very constructive.

Can you tell me which modern religion doesn’t profess to provide a moral compass?

While many medical doctors do not recite the Hippocratic Oath, it is totally applicable here.

FIRST DO NO HARM.

Prolonging pain without a foreseeable remedy is harmful. This is a no brainer.

I know they aren’t, I’m saying their claim is that they are.

It’s even common to claim everything God does is just and right. If gay people get killed in a nightclub, it’s because they’ve sinned, and that’s Gods will, therefore, the gunman was doing the right thing.

Then you get the people with cognitive dissonance who claim that slavery was moral because God stipulated rules about how the slaves should be treated and “it was a different time”.

Then you get the people who turn themselves into bombs and believe mass murder is right, and the people that died should thank them, because the psycho took their victims to heaven with them.

Then you get the people who vote against abortion rights because they believe the most ethical thing to do is save babies, even if it risks the mothers life, or guarantees poor life quality (either from poverty or developmental issues).

It’s ALL a moral claim. When your moral foundation is God, nothing you can do in service of what that God supposedly says can be wrong.

For the uninitiated:

• 2.2 NY = 4.1 Sheet Cants
• 2.2 YN = 3.8 Dawg Cants

Their main point is to convince people they are, hence, gay pope.

What is even the point of religion now? They profess to be a moral compass, but when they catch-up with the times, half of their followers cry “traitor!”.

Why are you thinking about erections my dude?

I said THEATRE, not movie! It’s a live performance, sheesh.

This is why in electrical trade you’re taught to use your right hand, with your right foot below your shoulder, and left leg out (when doing anything sketchy).

If you do get shocked then the current will travel down the right-side of your body, and out through your right leg.

That’s not to say throw caution to the wind, but some people need to do risky things (that’s why sparkies get paid a lot).

For example, a guy I used to work with had to repair a switchboard at the hospital, which supplied power to the theatre rooms. Time sensitive matter as I’m sure you can imagine.

This guy was a pro, and was wise to take the safety precaution. When it came time to power back on the switchboard, not only did he right-hand/right-foot, he shielded his body and face with the switchboards door panel.

Something inside blew up, and he got his hand burned quite badly. Fortunate for him to be at a hospital. In this case he didn’t need the right-hand/right-foot technique, but if things happened differently, it could have saved his life.

What is normal, what we’ve been conditioned to believe, or what produces feelings of repulsion are not good moral foundations.

I’m only interested in what is ethical. I’m not convinced there is any reason to consider cows, or even fish, to be less deserving of life than a dog.

So?

Is the implication that it is ethically permissible to eat other animals like cats, because they haven’t had the same evolutionary privileges?

[Vegans diets require supplements to achieve the same results as omnivore diets]

This is really a non issue, it’s not hard, it’s just a minor change. I’ve been vegan for about 3 years now. Every morning I have a vitamin B12, and in the evening I have an Omega 3, Vitamin C, Magnesium and Calcium.

Every six months I get my blood tested. My GP is always surprised that I’m consistently landing in the centre of the recommended range on all metrics, including iron.

Forget rights.

What ethical foundation permits someone to kill animals when they don’t need to?

There’s something special about every animal, dogs are no exception. If you spend time with cows and pigs, you’ll know they’re capable of being gentle, loving creatures. Pigs are arguably smarter than dogs in some ways.

Many people will argue that it is morally permissible to eat non-human animals because of the difference in intelligence. This isn’t a very good argument though. Suppose an alien species with an IQ of 300 visited Earth. Using the logic above, you would have to concede to their request to eat you.

At a bare minimum, the benchmark should be based on suffering. But even this has flaws. If I was to raise my human child until they were 10, then kill them painlessly in their sleep so I could eat them, people would be mortified.

I personally don’t think there is an ethical basis for eating meat of any kind, provided you don’t live in a food desert.

I don’t give a fuck about anyone’s religion lol.

Every single religion can clean my asshole with their tongue after I’ve eaten Mexican for a week.

Why do you think Zionists exist? Religion. Blame religion.

It was a joke about how everyone is excited for the weekend.

Pretty sure Friday is most peoples holy day.

HFIF

Meanwhile, Coldplay:

“And it was all Yellow”

Damn, snails would have been better, since they have shells