Hello

[DogmaticDownSouth]

What morality do I assert that you should or should not eat meat?

As with the former case I would invite you to mind your own business.

Where do you get the right to tell anyone else how to live?

Did you read the actual post? your selective quote is intellectually dishonest. I specifically stated waht right do I have to DICTATE to some on else :none. Period. same for you and anyone else. PERIOD.
I don't think you understand the concept of a conversation. I have invitied people to join willing join me in a conversation, I have not told anyone to do anything. I have asked if anyone would be interested in hearing and critiquing my arguements adn you want to then great, if not then DONT READ THE THREAD ABOUT IT. I haven't interjected my opinoin in some-on elses conversation nor have I even IMPLIED i should dictate how someone else should live. I see you have a lot of stars so I suppose you are a popular person on these threads, but my limited interaction with you leaves me believing you are not intellectually honest, certainly within the context of this thread. I don't know what you are like elsewhere.

Same question to you, where do you get the right to tell anyone else how to live?

For those who did not see the actual post: ( added all Caps IF YOU WANT to emphasize the point of minimilist's out of context quote. else un-edited)

What morality do I assert that you should or should not eat meat? I have what I feel is a sound moral arguement for being a vegetarian and would be happy to try to convince you if YOU WANT. Just like that I feel I have a sound moral arguement (2 seperate ones actually) that lead to conclusion that in most situations (and exceptions are built into the framework of the arguement, not post-hoc or ad-hoc) a woman has a moral obligation to the fetus, her desire to want it or not is independent of that. That's what a moral arguement is.
If you are asking me what justification do I have to dicated to a woman that she must complete her pregnancy (or conversely that she must have an abortion as folks in China can tell you), I would say none, because morality is not an arguement for compulsion. That is what the law is for. I am not, nor have I, advocated for a legal arguement restricting abortion. That is the role of the government as a reflection of the society. I am a member of the society but not of the government.
However, if I have a sound arguement that convinces a woman not to have an abortion and she convinces some one else and so on then the law doesn't really matter does it?
Again this is the difference between what I believe morality is (what we should do) and legality (what we must or must not do). Laws can be moral or immoral and morality can be legal or illegal.

---

@LastPoet

Thanks for the welcome

@ingoramus
Got a few more posts from my respondent and answered my questions, they were both idiotic and intellectually dishonest. They finally tried to be specific and thought they laid a trap for me with who enforces a moral right, and my point is that moral rights are innate whereas legal rights are extended a government and may enhance or reduce our moral rights, eg slaves had moral rights to life and freedom but did not have legal rights. Response. Slaves did not have moral rights because they were taken away from them. I have ended my conversations at this point because they are either dumb or dishonest and the post seemed to be both. I may post a few of their replies, but primarily i will post a thread on my moral arguements soon and would greatly apprecuate honest feedback and comments and I would be happy to have a dialoge about my thoughts and your thoughts on my thoughts. If you want to create a threads on the morality of abortion then I would be happy to do the same for you or anytopic you choose thatI feel I can interject. Thanks again for the welcom