I think you are confused. I am choosing taste. I value my pallet over the animals because they are animals. Call it selfish if you like I won’t deny it. So again you don’t have any arguments to sway me, I am not suffering from cognitive dissonance. Your options are to work with the system to promote change from within in a positive direction that makes the animals welfare improve or ignore the system. The system will continue if you ignore it Until you can reconcile that fact, there is no discussion that can be had.
You don’t have to. You choose to for a bunch of feelings and “identities” which have nothing to do with “caloric appropriation”.
I think you are confused. I am choosing taste. I value my pallet over the animals because they are animals. Call it selfish if you like I won’t deny it. So again you don’t have any arguments to sway me, I am not suffering from cognitive dissonance. Your options are to work with the system to promote change from within in a positive direction that makes the animals welfare improve or ignore the system. The system will continue if you ignore it Until you can reconcile that fact, there is no discussion that can be had.
Why would I try to sway a selfish sociopath with arguments?
Your claims to being open for discussion go out the window the moment you put your taste experience before the lives of “animals”.