>>11363046>what's evil with what he said?Are you fucking kidding? Do you seriously need it explained to you why genetically reprogramming humans to be allergic to meat is "evil"?
I'm just gonna make that question rhetorical and explain it to you like you're an idiot child (which you are), because you'll probably pussy out of a response.
First, it's just generally morally repugnant because you're essentially making it so they experience anaphylactic shock and die for "breaking the rule" and eating meat. What if someone raises livestock on their own personal, private property for their own private consumption? Why the fuck should they be punished for eating meat that they themselves raised?
Second, it's ethically abhorrent because you're robbing human beings of their freedom of choice, and you're rewriting their DNA against their will.
Third, it's just flat out fucking stupid and retarded because it assumes that you'll never have to eat meat. It's beyond obvious that both this kike puppet and you have never spent a single night outside of a building in your life. You live a life excess, surrounded by food and plenty, and don't understand how quickly that can disappear. Imagine you somehow get stranded in the wilderness and you have no food. You have no way to get yourself rescued. You have no idea what plants are edible. What now dipshit? You're allergic to meat, so you're just fucked. Well, your faggot ass would never catch anything anyway, you'd be fucked regardless, but for everyone else that might find themselves in this hypothetical scenario, this would be a needless death sentence.
Beyond all that, it's just fucking ridiculous because it's like using a hand grenade to open a can of soup. If you want to limit the consumption of meat, you can just enforce laws that restrict the amount of land that can be allotted to ranges and cattle.
There's zero good argument for this, from any perspective. It's not only evil, it's fucking retarded.
