Batboy said:No I don't buy that... you qualified that 'choose not to' with a surreptitous anti-meat eating snipe. and even then that was in an 'ideal' world. Why not let people simply choose as they wish, without having to emotionally qualify your 'choose to' statement that when interpretated appears as 'veggie is the right way and meat eating is the wrong way'?
What I said was
" You'd choose not to, because you'd realise that you don't need to and that your pleasure is not worth the death of an animal." which was in response to this
" so a fox can eat meat because its a fox
but in your ideal world I'd be banned from eating meat because that would be wrong "
Bearing in mind that there cannot be an ideal world that satisfies everyone, I was answering from my ideal world. The poster even refers to my ideal world.In my ideal world there'd be no need to ban anything that I think is wrong, people wouldn't do it because they too would think it wrong.
In my opinion " 'veggie is the right way and meat eating is the wrong way"
