I literally already explained that in the comment you’re replying to. The sea lion should have done something bad to deserve being criticized.

That just doesn’t work, because the sea lion’s behavior in the comic is entirely reasonable, and it is the other characters who are being unreasonable. If the point of the comic is that the sea lion’s behavior is bad, they should have actually made the sea lion do something bad instead of call out someone being racist against him

not a racist conversation, because sea lions are not sentient beings despite what is about to happen

sea lions literally are sentient beings in the context of the comic. the only justification the comic gives for why sea lions are bad requires them being sentient beings so that they can speak up against random racist tirades about them.

are you literate

It’s just obviously not about all the stuff that you seem to think it’s about.

But it literally is? You’re the one coming up with weird interpretations about “what if it was actually about xyz”

What is actually happening in the comic is that a character is being racist and the victim of that racism is portrayed as being wrong and annoying for calling out the racism. That’s literally what’s happening in the comic. It doesn’t require any kind of gymnastics or interpretation, that’s the surface level reading of what is occurring in the comic.

Racism justifies harassment and home invasion?

Yeah. Not gonna cry over what the victims of racism do to racists.

and more about the harassment veiled in false civility as a means of silencing discussion.

How is the sea lion silencing discussion? They weren’t discussing anything, they were having a racist circlejerk. The racist lady said a racist thing and the sea lion invited discussion by asking, “Why did you say that racist thing?” and then they refused to actually explain why they’re racist against sea lions, treating it as self-evident that being racist against sea lions is correct and thus that it is unreasonable to question it.

Pretend he’s not a sea lion, but a conservative

He can’t choose not to be a sea lion. This is kind of incoherent. “Pretend he’s not black, but a conservative.” This sea lion could also be conservative, that doesn’t really have anything to do with the fact that he’s being criticized for immutable properties he was born with, not for anything of substance.

I gotta be honest, the sea lion is not the bad guy in this comic. Lady randomly says some racist shit, and a member of the group she’s being racist against calls her out for being racist. And then the fact that the sea lion called the racist out is apparently justification for the initial racist statement.

No. Years.

The fact that Biden’s brain was turning to jello before our eyes was only a big topic of conversation because delusional libs refused to acknowledge it for years. “Trump is incoherent” is not a big topic of conversation because no one who is human denies it, it’s been obvious since before Biden was a serious candidate

Sounds like the free market has spoken. Please die quickly, ““AI”” industry

Best I can offer is $10 for one of ya finger bones. I’m a nice guy though so you can pick which one. Deal?

If the only animal corpses anyone ate was euthanized pet remains and the practice was somehow free of influencing the unnecessary euthanization of more pets, I can’t say I care. Same way I don’t really care if people eat roadkill or animal products from a dumpster. I’m not going to do it, I don’t see these things as food. And I think there’s a minuscule harm done in the proliferation of the perception of these things as food. But that harm is negligible in the face of animal agriculture which is my primary concern.

What part of my reference to it as animal abuse sounds like an endorsement of the practice? I’m not sure about you, but personally I consider animal abuse to be unacceptable.

But then you’re still causing plants pain by farming and eating them. Isn’t that argument no different than saying if you believe that harming animals causes them pain, you should be in favor of eating the ones that are hunted because farming them causes more pain?

If you insist on animal abuse then you should do it through hunting rather than factory farming precisely because of the diminished amount of suffering caused. But it’s still more suffering than would be caused by just eating plants so I’m not sure I understand your point

If you actually believe harming plants causes them pain and that that is bad, you should be vegan. Animal agriculture harms far, far more plants than any plant agriculture ever could.

Not only do you jump to an insane straw man.

It wasn’t an insane strawman though? It was literally the argument they made. Something has to die for you to eat, therefore it doesn’t matter how many things you kill or how necessary those deaths are. The fact that you must kill something absolves you of any guilt for any amount of killing, is the ridiculous argument the person made (and which carnists often make) which we are making fun of for being obviously evil and wrong.

I just don’t understand why it’s necessary to be a nuisance to other people inside their homes at any hour on any day, outside of necessary rare events such as work being done on the house with power tools. I manage to live my life without creating a noise that could conceivably wake someone at any hour of any day more than once a month or two. I view people blasting loud music, letting their dogs bark for hours on end, mowing lawns with deafening machinery, and so on as the equivalent of walking around my house banging pots and pans together. I know you think of it as “necessary” but I assure you that it isn’t. You’re loud because you don’t care about the disturbance you cause people, not because you truly have to be.

Obama was significantly less evil than Biden, who was himself not as competently evil (at the time of his presidency) as Harris is / will be.

Obama picked Biden as his VP in order to shore up the more evil, racist, conservative side of the Democratic party and undecided “moderates.” He was a segregationist, a virulent racist, a sexual abuser, and a lifelong monster.

Obama wasn’t a good guy either but the trend is definitely toward greater evil.

Exactly! In English! Which this person does not know!

You seem to be getting pretty confused here. We’re talking about the literal meanings, that is to say the ones that someone who doesn’t have a strong grasp of English should know. Metaphors and idioms and so on are famously difficult for those without a strong grasp on the language, but I am arguing that this is not one of those. This is a phrase with a straightforward literal meaning, unlike such phrases as “pulling your leg.”

Or the number of days since their birth? That’s the simpler explanation.

“Those apples are numbered” = “we know how many apples there are right now”

No, that does not make equal literal sense to what I said. Because days that are in the past are gone, we don’t have them anymore. We refer to moving through time as “killing” time or as “losing” time, in English we don’t tend to think of the past as something we currently have. The future is something we have or will have, the past is something we had and no longer have.

No, it’s not a false equivalency at all. It’s the natural result of a strategy which begins and ends with “choose the lesser evil” with no regard for the fact that the lesser and greater evil are becoming steadily more evil every single cycle.

This path leads to fascism no matter how you try to spin it.