>>519147740
>You are being intellectually dishonest or you don't know shit about history. Or both.
no, you are being a dumbass. killing humans has always been socially acceptable in particular contexts - war, sacrifice, punishment - but has never been socially acceptable without context.
>The whole concept is only valuable when you aren't out to backstab me, which is why it's not hypocritical for me to use your own bullshit against you.
correct but irrelevant. if society kills dogs it should be okay with killing fetuses, because a dog deserves life more than a fetus based on the metrics that we generally use to define the worthiness of a life or the importance of suffering or whatever. your suggestion that i should be killed arbitrarily cuts against the social metrics that i identified, but society is the hypocrite in this example, not you personally, so your personal defence of your own personal (non-)hypocrisy is irrelevant.
>I have deemed you less worthy of life than I am.
i don't really care about your opinions, because you have already confessed that you are arguing in bad faith. you claim that that's okay because i was the one arguing in bad faith to start with, but i wasn't. you just constructed some retarded strawman out of your own ignorance and incompetent half-formed assumptions and then used that strawman to justify your own immoral behaviour. you will do it again.
you are like a dog in barbed wire, too stupid to help yourself and too mad with pain to let anyone else, and so all i can do is watch you bleed. your next post will be just as embarrassing and retarded as your last one and i wish you wouldn't do that to yourself, but the dog returns to his vomit. or something. fuck this gay analogy anyway.