An uncomfortable truth

Pro lifers and pro gun control people: Human life is PRICELESS and must be saved no matter what!!!  If it SAVES just ONE life, then the control is worth it.

Me: If that’s true, then the government can force people to adopt as many starving children as they can afford (if it saves just one life).

Human life is not priceless.  That may make you uncomfortable because you want to act like you care about your life as priceless and want to apply that to everyone.  But you value your life way more than you do other people’s lives, and you are selfish (nothing wrong with that; I’m very selfish because I’m willing at some point to spend money on a house for myself but I don’t want to adopt a child; I do not love that neighbor as myself).

So either the Bible is wrong and the left saying, “If it saves just one life, then it would be worth it” is equally wrong, or you better get to adopting as many kids as you can afford.

You sound a lot like Peter Singer

Actually, we are pretty different.  He might argue that society indeed should be forced to help starving children because to him, human life is priceless.  I believe that human life is not priceless (which is why I don't want to adopt and I don't believe anyone should be forced to adopt).  I would rather have a poor innocent child starve to death or suffer in foster care than to adopt him.  If you think that's unjustly selfish, then adopt.

Neither one of us eat meat due to us believing on a personal level, it's unjustified homicide, but he's more socialist and I'm more libertarian.  On economics, we could not be more different.

Yes; there are different types of vegetarians/vegans.  Some believe we have an obligation to help the poor (like Peter Singer).  Others believe the obligation merely is not harming animals.  Like I wouldn't eat an animal, but if I have to spend thousands of dollars to save an animal's life, I wouldn't do it; but Peter would.  That's fine as long as he does not force me by the power of the state to participate in his charity.

I tried to be vegetarian, but its hard. After a year, I had dreams where I eat meat.

Try beyond burgers.

So the pro life argument is that murder is wrong just to clarify . 

The pro gun argument is that people should have the means to defend themselves, particularly if they live 100 miles from civilization in bear country.

So your saying that MAGA MORONS would need an assault weapon, an AR style weapon, to kill a bear? 

Do you think that would be an appropriate choice for killing a bear?

No matter how many times you tell this guy who pretends he was a marine, he still thinks AR stands for assault rifle

No genius. I never said AR stands for assault rifle. I said assault weapon, that would be AW right?

Are you busy cashing out the register at the Dennys right now or something?

Marine is always capitalized genius. Did they not teach you that in the continuation school you were sent to?

marine

yes marine.

The only marine spelled with a capital M is Marine Le  Pen 

@WyIted

Don't make this argument unless you support banning all guns in cities and suburbs, where bears don't exist.  If your sole argument for wearing a condom is you don't want to get the girl pregnant, then there is no point in you wearing the condom if the woman hypothetically had her uterus removed (by choice before you were dating her).