You are just keep switching the subject of intention for your convenience. Milk is not intended to be… humans are intended to… If you only consider the intention of the consumer, of course it is always intended to consume whatever is nutritious. The logic flaw is in the case of milk you suddenly switch to consider the intention of the producer which is the cows. Are you doing this intentionally (pun intended) or is it a blind spot for you because you hate milk?
If you keep asking questions about different topics, you’re going to receive answers about different topics.
That doesn’t mean I’m being inconsistent, it means that I’m consistently answering your inconsistent questions.
Your newest topic is based on the false premise that I am considering the intention of cows, which I am not.
You’re making that up and then following up your false claim by asking me why I believe cows have intention because it’s an indefensible point.
You got confused four or five comments ago and you’re trying to use disingenuous, obscure questioning and false assertions in an attempt to ignore and draw attention away from the clear answers you’ve received that logically show you why meat is biologically and historically intended to be eaten by carnivores and omnivores.
It’s not working, but it is funny that you keep trying, so go wild.
Hmm, I see. How about you go ahead and clarify for me whose intention you’re talking about in either cases?
Initially, I said that cow milk is intended for cow babies and goat milk is intended for goat babies.
You asked why that means humans are intended to eat cow meat.
Doesn’t really follow, but I played along and explained the biological and historical intentions of predator and prey.
You got confused real quick, didn’t you?
