I tapped out? Didn't you focus brah?
But why would you personally go out of your way to harm one of god's creatures if you are such a religious man?
If you're a nihilist, then I get it but surely you don't subscribe to the whole "god put animals on this earth for us to eat" school of thought do you? Do you just skip the whole thou shall not kill thing too?
"That is, if you believe that is wrong for you, then that seems fair enough (good for you). But, why would that also be wrong for me or anyone else? To put it another way, what if my own personal truth is that it is fine to eat meat? Who, then, is anyone else to judge me for that? Aren't you pushing your morals on me? "
And that's why I think it's fine to eat other people (particularly Christians who only come on SLAP to push their religious agenda), if that's my personal truth then you shouldn't judge me for that brah
That's what it would boil down to. If there is no standard that transcends personal convictions, cultures, and societies, then nothing could be considered to be universally wrong (even cannibalism). Yet, people, cultures, societies, courts of law, judges, etc. consider a multitude of things to be wrong all the time, they demand justice when wrongs take place, and so forth.
It just shows the inconsistency of 'ethical/moral relativism' (that people have their own individual mortal truths that are true for them, but not for anyone else) - if you, or anyone else is a moral relativist, then good for you on your opinions, and you might as well keep them to yourself (practically speaking). Yet, people point the finger at actions they consider to be wrong all the time. (thus, relativism is utterly contradictory to the way the world actually works). Relativism (or, even more precisely, making universal moral claims while denying the Universal Moral Standard that is God) is completely self contradictory and thus philosophically untenable.
Or, it goes the other way and literally nothing at all could be considered to be universally wrong in society, which would lead to utter chaos.
Nevertheless, you are not a Christian, so leave the Bible aside for the time being; and give me sound reasons why I or anyone else outside of the scope of your own personal opinions and convictions should consider anything we old to be true to conversely be wrong. How is asserting your own moral convictions on me, when mine differ from yours, not to be considered as judgmental, condescending, and the like? (I don't think you are being that way, and you have proven yourself to be a pretty stand up chap in the past, but I do want to hear your explanation there).