not any group. nonhumans.

it’s illogical to try to fly a plane like you are driving a car. different things are different and it is correct to treat them so.

people should be treated differently than animals. doing so is necessary for right action. how we treat animals should have no bearing on how we treat each other.

Declaring that humans and chickens are distinct is not sufficient to say to they deserve radically different ethical consideration.

it is. ethics are a social construct developed by humans to help them understand correct action in human society. chickens are only relevant to the extent that it impacts how people relate to one another

You could for instance, use that to say any group of humans are distinct in some way and thus deserve different moral consideration. Be it by gender, skin tone, etc.

comparing women to animals is what misogynists do. comparing other races to animals is what racists do. lets be better than them.

nope. I’ve said what I wanted to say.

well after the revolution, we (anarchists) need to understand the counterrevolutionary mindset of statists as much as statists need to understand (what they call) counterrevolutionaries

if you’re a leninist you really should read Galleani

I’ve seen NTT before. I know exactly what’s going on. anybody who reads this is welcome to decide which of us is being more dishonest.

as I said, I won’t be answering your question. it’s a fallacious line of reasoning.

it’s been ages since I’ve seen someone trot out “name the trait” or ntt, so forgive me if I’m a bit rusty.

ntt is a form argument that devolves to the spectrum fallacy or line drawing fallacy. basically, it is clear that humans have a set of traits, and chickens have a set of traits, and we can create a human-chicken spectrum. being unable to point to which part of the spectrum you go from human to chicken or vice versa, being unable to draw a line, does not negate the fact that people are not chickens and chickens are not people.

so I won’t be answering your direct question

I’m for equality of people

great.

the same people trying to kill section 230

first of all, I don’t kill animals, except pests or by accident.

second, how can animals deserve… anything?

eating meat isn’t cruel

just because it’s free doesn’t mean it’s worthless, and charging for content doesn’t make it valuable

nobody is going to want to create new content when they get paid nothing or almost nothing for doing so.

that’s a lie