debate

I'm glad you have faith, but again, torture is subjective. You say by your own personal moral compass that YOU and YOU alone are just for NOT eating meat but there is no conclusive evidence that says it will change the world for the better. Also it was the rabbit that destroyed the continent of Australia's environment making it a larger desert. Should animals like the rabbit be punished for thier sin of harming the environment? If you can't prove to me that YOUR personal MORALS have a direct consequence then you are fussing over nothing.

Oh and rice by the way produces more methane than cows. Methane in rice paddies is produced by microscopic organisms that respire CO2, like humans respire oxygen. More CO2 in the atmosphere makes rice plants grow faster, and the extra plant growth supplies soil microorganisms with extra energy, pumping up their metabolism.

No it's a fact that going vegan would greatly help the environment. https://i.imgur.com/XPwFnVO.png?1 The vast majority of deforestation is also attributed to farming. It's undeniable that switching to veganism would be a positive impact to the environment. I would need a source on that rice thing, but even if I give that to you by stopping animal farming we still would almost halve our greenhouse gas emissions. But my main argument is morals and ethics. I feel like you aren't reading what I'm, saying, because I said before that rabbits are not like humans, they do not have critical thinking. Humans know right from wrong, animals do not. So I don't believe in subjective morals. We all know it's immoral to needlessly kill. It's how we can function in a society. I extend that to animals as well, which is only the logical thing to do. This isn't subjective, this is just the next logical conclusion, unless you can answer the question down below. So I'll ask again, what trait does an animal possess that takes away their moral consideration, and why can't that same trait apply to a human to take theirs away as well?

My answer is because you just said that a Rabbit cannot be judged like a human for sin but a human can for the sake of an animal's human right. You want one while denying the other. To say I am wrong for viewing animals as a different entity while you say the same. They need human protection, because they are not human, but they should be seen human in your eyes.

moral - concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.....think morals apply to just humans

A rabbit can't be judged because it doesn't know any better. People do. Why should I see a rabbit as human? If your implying that I have to to give it basic rights then I disagree. I would give a rabbit the basic right to life as I would anything that has a subjective life experience. Can you name the trait please? Are you saying nature? Can you simplify it for me? @koro actually I believe some animals do show some very basic signs of morality. like rats will forgo chocolate to save a drowning rat that it was raised with. pretty interesting stuff

that could be something that the animal is trained to do ...a wild rat would prioritise self-survival first by instinct ^^

they weren't trained to forgo the chocolate, it was just an experiment they did if you wanna read more about it https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/05/rats-forsake-chocolate-save-drowning-companion "A new study shows that rats will, indeed, rescue their distressed pals from the drink—even when they’re offered chocolate instead. They’re also more likely to help when they’ve had an unpleasant swimming experience of their own, adding to growing evidence that the rodents feel empathy."