[Kentl]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

It can't be a straw-man because it is my assertion. For something to be a straw man, it must be a false caricature of *your* assertion.

You've said we can see the laws of nature in animal behavior. I see animals killing all the time, often for fun. You've said that killing is wrong imagining some nuance is important.[/QUOTE]
show me one time when an anmial kills for fun
which has nothing to do with
hunting for food
getign less strong anmails out of their terrtoys
and portectin their young
you make the claim you back it up

Originally Posted by JerryLove

On the other hand, no animals at all drive cars (except people). None build wagons, or chariots, or bicycles, or anything of the kind. So obviously *that's* "against the laws of nature".

they do use vines and other things to get around and they do build things
mounds
nests
ect
they build things (buld wagons and all fo thiose)
this is why it is a straw man
it dose not have to be the eact thing
for instance burilding
its not wrong they bulrd stuff
jsut becuse anmails dont eat rommon dose not make it worn
becuse anmails EAT

Originally Posted by JerryLove

While I'm at it: no animals wear clothes. Obviously that's immoral too.

they do wear stuff to keep them selfs warm and some creatures use the bodys of other creatures to keep the babys warm

all cloths are is humans way of keepign warm ebcuse we dont have the hair
(much like the anamils who "dress them self in sand"
or mud

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Animals also don't have religion. Religion too must be against the laws of nature.

this one had my stumped
manly becuse there is no proof they dont have god on their minds
humans by iinsitnce look for a "higer being"
maybe anmails do the same thing
no way to proove or disproove

Originally Posted by JerryLove

The list is long.

si si the list of my awnsers to these