Eating Meat?

[U.R.B.4.U.R.]

And just because it was " more humane" in 1806. ( which I doubt) why does that matter if it is still inhumane. 8(

 

[ebola?]

Please try to stop vollying attacks, people (I know this comment is a bit late).

ebola

 

[U.R.B.4.U.R.]

8) Just wake up from your nappie.

 

[ebola?]

largely, yes.

 

[U.R.B.4.U.R.]

Let us know when you go down again, and we can continue with our personal attacks in peace.

Kidding!

I will attempt to keep my righteous rage in check.

 

[redemptionsong]

Frankly, humankind is a parasite which feeds off other living things. Mass slaughter of living organisms is human nature. Goes along with the concepts of greed and glutony. So vegetarians out there, sorry, cant deny my human nature to gorge myself on another animals flesh (in so many words)

 

[ralph_monsters]

I am a vegan, i have been so for about a year. I have been vegetarian for over three years.

Contrary to popular belief, not every vegetarian is the 'save the whales' 'save the rainforests' 'save the grand canyon' type.
I eat the way i do because i feel healthier, my head is more cleared up, i feel more focused, and my body feels clean. If it wasnt for this immediate satisfaction i probably would not be so committed.

However this is only one of the reasons why i dont eat meat. Basically i just feel that it is unnecessary for me to do it. There is such a massive variety of food available for people that eliminating meat has absolutely no effect on their lives. Get to know some good veggie/vegan cooks and i promise you will never miss eating meat.

And just to shed some light on some particular topics in this thread.

I often hear people talk about how they think vegetarians believe they are so much better than people that eat meat. However i have rarely ever met one that acts in this way. On the contrary, i often see meat eating types ridicule vegetarians, giving unintelligent overviews of the nature of the universe.
I mean, every time i sit down to eat with someone they seem to think i am obligated to give them a full report on why i choose not to eat meat, interrogating my thoughts to try and justify their choices, when i never commented on their eating habits in the first place.

And as for not eating meat making you less intelligent(if that was just a joke, bear with me, i only skimmed the middle region of this thread),,,some of the greatest minds of the past millennium were vegetarians.

among the many,

Albert Einstein

Isaac Newton

Charles Darwin

Leonardo da Vinci

Thomas Edison

along with many, many, many more...

 

[ebola?]

>>Frankly, humankind is a parasite which feeds off other living things. Mass slaughter of living organisms is human nature. Goes along with the concepts of greed and glutony. So vegetarians out there, sorry, cant deny my human nature to gorge myself on another animals flesh (in so many words)
>>

"Human nature" is very often a cop-out for those trying to justify the current arrangement.

ebola

 

[DJDannyUhOh]

Human nature is a perceived norm and varies from society to society so we can neither justify nor condem our actions because of it.

 

[U.R.B.4.U.R.]

Ralph. Nice balanced reply. See your point and have noticed the same.

DJ Great point.

 

[vegan]

[ elephant, a bull or a gorilla ] But they don't need as much.. power or energy, as we do, or namely our minds

wishful thinking
think about it for a while... and don't worry, it won't make you too hungry

Yes, and my theoretic example, which came from your statement about "rather starve than eat meat", not "rather eat vegetables than eat meat" was my point. Yes, the option to eat vegetables instead of meat is a scenario, but I was specifically referring to your point of "starve than eat meat."

No, because eating anyting other than meat wasn't mentioned. It was eat meat or starve

i got it! you're just teasing me and you actually did understand why it's senseless to try to use my example out of its context.

you did understand how the generalization in practice to a whole population of a theoretical and non-applicable example used to explain the motivation of an individual has no value against the motivation

naughty boy. i almost thought we were still at it!

It's easy to say when you're perfectly healthy, but when people do get sick, cancer for example, they're going to demand alternate treatments and research when they find themself in such dire situations.

so you advocate the solution of the coward and selfish : to make others suffer instead of you?
i know i'd be desperate for a treatment if i was suffering, but i wouldn't want others to suffer for of me. that wouldn't be any solution to the end of the suffering. it would just be to put the dust under the carpet

actually... gorillas(and others apes) have been known to eat meat

great, gorillas "have been known to"!
how many? is it any relevant to the fact that gorillas on a vegetarian diet can beat up your dad anytime?
cause after a search, my internet still says they are herbivorous
and it still says the same about elephants and bulls

why should we limit our body in what it can gain nutrition out of?

we shouldn't, chocolate rules
we should limit our diet to aliments that don't kill anyone

Who has actually made the decision for each and every one of us that animals are not for us to eat?

and who has made the decision that you're not for me to eat?
who has made the decision that blacks are not for white to exploit or women for men to oppress?
our freedom stops where starts the freedom of others
if animals are concerned, especially since it's their suffering, freedom and life, their interests have to be taken into account

Do lions ask zebras if they want to be eaten? There really is no difference since we're all *animals*

do zebras want to be eaten?
there is no difference between humans and other animals as far as the interest in being free, not suffering and being killed goes
but there is a big difference that allows us to think about the consequences of our acts and to find other alternatives if we understand that they're going to cause suffering
you can't explain to a lion that it's going to harm the zebra
you can explain it to a human

And asking a town to rename itself to Veggieland is fanatical any way you look at it

it would be stupid if it was serious
but since it has no chance to happen whatsoever, it's obviously a symbolic joke. just to have it mentioned in the media

'don't argue with idiots.

Yet another example of the arrogance associated with people that do not eat meat just to act like they are above everybody else. Gees, just admit it.

i hate to be rude, but i'd rather have you admit that your answers in this and that thread don't leave us much choice

Barring chicken, perhaps, most food industry animals are kept in better, safer conditions than they would be living in in nature [...]Nothing has really changed, except that "factory farming" conditions are a lot more humane than those found on a typical frontier ranch in 1806...

i suggest you just register again with a new name if you don't want people to read your posts thinking "from an ignorant fool"

So vegetarians out there, sorry, cant deny my human nature to gorge myself on another animals flesh

how funny. you can't, i can!
so if meat makes you strong at anything (sic), it's certainly not will power

 

[U.R.B.4.U.R.]

Vegan, I admit to you right now I eat meat. I have my own criteria for how and when, but that doesn't change the fact that I eat meat and fish.

Now, your post is very good and your reasoning is strong in my book and I'm not going to argue with it. Rather than that I will quit eating meat.

_________________________________________________________

so you advocate the solution of the coward and selfish : to make others suffer instead of you?
i know i'd be desperate for a treatment if i was suffering, but i wouldn't want others to suffer for of me. that wouldn't be any solution to the end of the suffering. it would just be to put the dust under the carpet

-___________________________________________________________

This is the strongest point you make and I can not agree more.

Thanks for posting.

 

[InsideOut26]

John Robbins Diet For a New America did me in.

Although, I'm only a vegetarian I avoid drinking milk and feel pretty guilty for supporting the veal industry with the dairy I consume. Sort of contrary to the point can anyone suggest a good soymilk, I can't seem to find one I like?

 

[ralph_monsters]

"good soymilk"

i dont know if i falls under your definition of good...but i always drink Silk brand. It is pretty common i think, as that most supermarkets around here carry it.

Because it is so popular i could imagine you have already classified it under the not-good category. Yet i think it tastes great, especially with cereal or the chocolate flavored variation.

I remember reading that udder infection is so common in dairy cows that a typical glass of milk has something like 8 drops of puss in it.

I think about that every time i drink soy milk and it begins to taste pretty great.

 

[DJDannyUhOh]

so you advocate the solution of the coward and selfish : to make others suffer instead of you?
i know i'd be desperate for a treatment if i was suffering, but i wouldn't want others to suffer for of me. that wouldn't be any solution to the end of the suffering. it would just be to put the dust under the carpet

First let me point out for the billionth time that you continually insult the other points of view by applying terms like "coward" and "selfish" to them. This is the main problem I have with people who are dead set against eating animal products. I do not care what you chose to eat, just don't think that the world revolves around your self-righteous ideology that makes others seem like they enjoy suffering. Now I have to endure being called less intelligent along with being labeled cowardly and selfish? I have not made one negative comment towards people that are vegetarians/vegans yet you deem it necessary to throw insults my way. When you levy insults towards others, it negates the fact that you are trying to be an advocate of less suffering in the world.

People with loved ones suffering would beg to differ, and when you're not confronted with such a situation, it's easy to sit back and make yourself look like the ultimate spirit of sacrifice by implying everyone else is a coward. I guess you could call the entire scientific community selfish and cowardly, but you tend to be very myopic in not realizing this isn't Utopia and everything comes with a price. You make it sound like humans get off by senselessly poking animals with a sharp stick, all the while ignoring the reasons WHY some animals suffer. I'm sorry if I seem selfish, but I would rather have an animal suffer in the benefit of seeing my own mother's suffering stop if it meant saving her life and other lives as well......but I guess that's just downright selfish of me.

and who has made the decision that you're not for me to eat?

Our global society as a whole is omnivorous. Except for a miniscule minority, we're socialized into a world presently dependent on animals. Straying from this culture is all well and good, but don't levy judgment on people for simply being products of their culture. Hey, in some cultures the females have their clitoris forcibly removed in order to make sex painful and reduce the chances that they will cheat on their husbands but you don't see me starting a thread on it.

who has made the decision that blacks are not for white to exploit or women for men to oppress?

I'm sure most African-Americans will love that you compare (even in the simplest of concepts) eating meat to the enslavement of their ancestors.

i hate to be rude, but i'd rather have you admit that your answers in this and that thread don't leave us much choice

I would like for you to point out what exactly I have said that justifies your rudeness and arrogance. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are the one assaulting people's age-old eating habits. I'm merely defending them.

how funny. you can't, i can!
so if meat makes you strong at anything (sic), it's certainly not will power

will·pow·er or will pow·er - n.
The strength of will to carry out one's decisions, wishes, or plans

If one does not decide, wish, or plan to stop eating meat, will power simply does not apply. We all applaud your will power, but don't infer that other people lack it because you falsely apply it to this situation.

 

[vegan]

First let me point out for the billionth time that you continually insult the other points of view by applying terms like "coward" and "selfish" to them

i just said the truth : that you advocate a "solution" that's coward and selfish. do you deny it?
if you find it insulting, then maybe these ideas don't really suit you after all and you should reconsider them

This is the main problem I have with people who are dead set against eating animal products

do you have the same problem with people who are dead set again the death penalty, racism or world hunger?
probably not
why not?
because in those others cases, you're not on the side that's been criticized
so you see people who fight for these causes as nice people doing the right thing

in the case of eating animals, you do what almost everyone does when they are criticized : before considering being wrong, you try to justify your position with clumsy arguments
that's what i did too the first time i heard about vegetarianism
but it's as legitimate to be dead set against eating animals as against other injustices

I do not care what you chose to eat, just don't think that the world revolves around your self-righteous ideology that makes others seem like they enjoy suffering

i don't think the world revolves explicitly around vegetarianism and i think no one should even ever think about it, because it should be as evident as not eating humans for instance. and i don't see you criticizing people for believing the world revolves around non-cannibalism

vegetarianism is not self-righteous
it would be if the only ones concerned were the vegetarians themselves
but the first ones concerned are the animals, and have no doubt that from the animal's point of view, the vegetarian is not being self-righteous, he's being right to the animals

I have not made one negative comment towards people that are vegetarians/vegans yet you deem it necessary to throw insults my way

i could say that i'm indeed grateful for you being polite
but for the sake of arguing i'll remind you how you also called me ignorant and keep calling me arrogant
i don't see how those are less insulting than calling someone's ideas coward and selfish
especially when these qualifiers are just describing a fact, not trying to lower the other one
on the other hand, i'll let people judge for themselves if i was proving myself ignorant when you called me so

People with loved ones suffering would beg to differ, and when you're not confronted with such a situation, it's easy to sit back and make yourself look like the ultimate spirit of sacrifice by implying everyone else is a coward.

thank you, but my grand father and a friend died of cancer 2 and 3 years ago.
my friend had all the time to describe to me the horror of the treatment and i'm well aware of what suffering means.
it doesn't change the fact that wanting to sacrifice animals instead of you is coward because you hide from the pain behind the animals, selfishly transferring the suffering to them

I guess you could call the entire scientific community selfish and cowardly

not everyone in the scientific community supports animal experimentation

but you tend to be very myopic in not realizing this isn't Utopia and everything comes with a price

and where does that come from?
in what big book of life have you read that everything comes with a price?
because i prefer to write the book myself and choose the best way possible rather than justify errors with pseudo great truths of life

this is as much an argument to me as saying "he died because of god's will, so it's ok" or "some people have to be poor for others to be rich"
i don't accept "it's the way it is" as a justification for injustice

these animals don't have to suffer. we don't have to experiment on them
if time, energy and money was used to develop and use alternative methods, we'd have a fully operative experimentation-free scientific community instead

You make it sound like humans get off by senselessly poking animals with a sharp stick

if you've seen reports or images about experimentation, you know you're not far from the truth

if you live in the real world, you've seen sadistic behaviours and you know you're true

all the while ignoring the reasons WHY some animals suffer

i didn't understand that

I would rather have an animal suffer in the benefit of seeing my own mother's suffering stop if it meant saving her life and other lives as well

one animal - other lives ??
do you know how many millions of animals are used every year in experimentation (billions in the meat industry)?

it's not one killed for one cured
if that was the case, it would be much more arguable
it's millions tortured and killed for an uncertain result that may very well have be obtained faster by alternative methods

Who has actually made the decision for each and every one of us that animals are not for us to eat?

and who has made the decision that you're not for me to eat?

Our global society as a whole is omnivorous. Except for a miniscule minority, we're socialized into a world presently dependent on animals. Straying from this culture is all. well and good, but don't levy judgment on people for simply being products of their culture Hey, in some cultures the females have their clitoris forcibly removed in order to make sex painful and reduce the chances that they will cheat on their husbands but you don't see me starting a thread on it

so you're saying that because our society is omnivorous but not cannibal , it's correct to consider that animals are for us to eat, but not humans?
so you're saying that culture gives right?
then you're saying that excision is justified because it's accepted by society

well, no. tradition doesn't defy reason

I'm sure most African-Americans will love that you compare (even in the simplest of concepts) eating meat to the enslavement of their ancestors.

you already said it in the lounge thread and i already answered this :
weren't white people saying exactly the same thing when accused of exploiting black people?
"you can't compare whites and blacks. we're talking god blessed creatures vs. creatures that don't even have a soul!"

sorry, but if we're talking about harming creatures, then the criteria that counts is their capacity to suffer.
and animals have a central nervous system allowing them to feel the same pain as a human, be he white or black.

it's a bit easy to pretend to be shocked by the comparison to try escaping the reality of the similarities

there's nothing shocking in comparing the exploitations of 2 different groups of individuals if these exploitations are based on the same idea of superiority

[...]

i'm sorry that you ignore it and try to dismiss my arguments by pretending to be shocked by comparisons that you don't understand

i compare the specific cases of slavery and animal exploitation, not blacks and animals in general
because blacks and animals both share the ability to feel pain and the interest in living, which is what counts in this case, so that makes their exploitations comparable

if the topic was the right to vote, i wouldn't compare them. because they obviously don't share the capacity to make a political choice

I would like for you to point out what exactly I have said that justifies your rudeness and arrogance

if you want to see what being rude means, check your soul mates' posts in the lounge thread
i've just excused myself for being rude (=curtly) in pointing out that you just didn't understand some things i said.
so what justifies my "rudeness"?
just that it's frustrating to repeat 3 times something and still have you interpret it the way you wish

as for arrogance, it's how you view it

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are the one assaulting people's age-old eating habits. I'm merely defending them

i haven't started any thread or even discussion about vegetarianism. i've always only replied to arguments that had already started. so don't pretend i'm assaulting people, i'm just taking part in an argument

start defending excision too, since apparently, the "age-old" part seems to be a pro argument to you

will·pow·er or will pow·er - n.
The strength of will to carry out one's decisions, wishes, or plans

"one's decisions"
doesn't that mean they have to be your own?
remember what i was replying to : "cant deny my human nature to gorge myself on another animals flesh"
"can't deny"
he can't choose for himself another decision than the one his human nature dictates
i don't see how it's his own decision
it's rather his lack of decision

 

[ebola?]

hi.
Just chiming into say that y'all should shy away from the attacks and meta-discussion. It is fruitless.

>>I guess you could call the entire scientific community selfish and cowardly
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


not everyone in the scientific community supports animal experimentation >>

Hi. I'm a vegan and a cognitive psychological researcher.

ebola

 

[U.R.B.4.U.R.]

hi.
Just chiming into say that y'all should shy away from the attacks and meta-discussion. It is fruitless
__________________________________________________________

How deep do you want to go with this? Most of the discussions on these forums tend to be fruitless.

I often think that myself. But lately I have seen the benifit of watching the cat chase its tail. Sooner or later you see the "fruitlessness" of it and decide to move away from that. So theres the benifit.

 

[DJDannyUhOh]

just said the truth : that you advocate a "solution" that's coward and selfish. do you deny it?

"Selfish" and "coward" have nothing to do with the fact that our research capabilities are limited. I have pointed out before, until we are free to manipulate stem cells without the interference of the government, we have little choice outside the few studies that actually do allow humans to volunteer. You're calling me cowardly and selfish because of the current way our research methods are set up and instead of realizing that, you find it more important to insult me rather than putting it into perspective.

but it's as legitimate to be dead set against eating animals as against other injustices

Again, you cannot compare the concepts of how we treat fellow human beings to what has been in our diet for hundreds of thousands of years. Again, this comes down to culture and how we perceive it. A diet that includes meat is concrete - there's biology behind it. Racism is a product of global or organizational socialization and had nothing to do with whether animals (only humans) exist or not.

but for the sake of arguing i'll remind you how you also called me ignorant and keep calling me arrogant

Well, a definition of ignorant is "unaware" and evidently you are unaware of this itself, no? I have accepted many of your ideas in this thread, yet you're either "unaware of" or just plain refuse to see my points of view, subsequently referring to them as "clumsy". The point of humans being dependent on animals is the dead truth and I can realize this AND also realize that we cause suffering, yet you label every point I've made here (except for being polite) as 100% nonsense.

because you hide from the pain behind the animals, selfishly transferring the suffering to them

We must address OUR pain before we can focus on the pain of the animals. I'm not hiding behind anything. Taking care of all creatures on this planet is indeed a high priority, however, we must take care of ourselves first. That's the number one priority for all living creatures - survive. If we can't care for ourselves, how will we learn or even continue to survive to care for others?

not everyone in the scientific community supports animal experimentation

The majority do and that's what we must address first. As I mentioned earlier, we have limited resources at present.

it's millions tortured and killed for an uncertain result that may very well have be obtained faster by alternative methods

Again, like I said earlier. What methods have I missed that we can use now that will give us more certain results? Humans? As I said earlier.....

if you've seen reports or images about experimentation, you know you're not far from the truth

I wouldn't advocate such senselessness. I'm taking about what we can substantially benefit from.

so you're saying that culture gives right?

No, I'm saying culture dictates norms and relativity. Neither eating meat nor not eating meat is a absolute right.

he can't choose for himself another decision than the one his human nature dictates

I'm not talking about one person, I'm talking about people who want to eat meat.

if you want to see what being rude means, check your soul mates' posts in the lounge thread

My soul mates? Are you referring to the title of a thread or other people? Also, may I point out it's the Lounge and certainly you cannot be saying I'm responsible for what other people say in there.

just that it's frustrating to repeat 3 times something and still have you interpret it the way you wish

In case you are "unaware", you do the exact same thing with my points.

As for seeing the fruitlessness of this, I'm all too aware of it. This can go on for another five billion pages. In being conscious of slowly changing old habits for the sake of others, I will always continue to consume or use animals products in one way or the other and as long as people accuse me of suffering, I will defend my actions accordingly. It's just that if someone is going to analyze my posts, I will do the same.

 

[vegan]

"Selfish" and "coward" have nothing to do with the fact that our research capabilities are limited. I have pointed out before, until we are free to manipulate stem cells without the interference of the government, we have little choice outside the few studies that actually do allow humans to volunteer. You're calling me cowardly and selfish because of the current way our research methods are set up and instead of realizing that, you find it more important to insult me rather than putting it into perspective

so all of a sudden it's not you anymore who are pro animal experimentation, it's just that you have little choice?

i encourage you to change your opinion, but at least don't deny what you said.
and you explicitly said that you agreed with animal experimentation in hope to cure humans, which is what i qualified of coward and selfish

Again, you cannot compare the concepts of how we treat fellow human beings to what has been in our diet for hundreds of thousands of years.

and why not?
does this also come from you big book of lame excuses?

i'll also remind you that although you try to present it as a food preference, it's not by calling problems by another name that you will resolve them.
the case we're talking about, much before only being "our diet" is "how we treat animals", which is absolutely comparable to how we treat humans

A diet that includes meat is concrete - there's biology behind it

and biology says we don't need meat, so what's your point?

Racism is a product of global or organizational socialization and had nothing to do with whether animals (only humans) exist or not.

and you think the way we treat animals is not a product of our culture?

i don't see many things more comparable to the oppression of a minority than the oppression of another minority

Well, a definition of ignorant is "unaware" and evidently you are unaware of this itself, no? I have accepted many of your ideas in this thread, yet you're either "unaware of" or just plain refuse to see my points of view, subsequently referring to them as "clumsy".

go back to the post where you called me ignorant and see if it i had indeed proven myself unaware of something

because i don't agree with your points doesn't mean i'm unaware of them, i've replied to all of them

find one point you made that i have ignored or haven't replied to

The point of humans being dependent on animals is the dead truth and I can realize this AND also realize that we cause suffering,

no we're not dependent on animals
our society makes the use of animals accepted, so we happen to rely on them on a regular basis, but it's not necessary at all

show me where i depend on animals in my life, i'll be glad to find an alternative

We must address OUR pain before we can focus on the pain of the animals [...]we must take care of ourselves first. That's the number one priority for all living creatures - survive.

and how about "we must address Our (we, all sentient beings) pain" at the same time

where do you draw the line of your favourite group?
if you claim that humans' pain counts more than animals', how can you contradict someone who will say "yes, but within humans, we have to cure men before women"

if the problem is pain, the criteria is the ability to feel pain, not the number of legs, the sex of the colour of skin

you have your preferences, and if you only want to work to cure humans it's your right. but it's not your right to do it to the detriment of another group of sentient being who have the same interest in not suffering

If we can't care for ourselves, how will we learn or even continue to survive to care for others?

???
so now you pretend to advocate torturing them now to be able to help them later?

i don't see how not including animal exploitation in our society would prevent us to care for ourselves

so here's an easy answer to your question : enlarge your definition of "ourselves" to all sentient beings and you'll notice that we're learning to care for Ourselves by not exploiting animals

The majority do and that's what we must address first. As I mentioned earlier, we have limited resources at present

and you're sure helping them stay limited by using their limitation as an excuse to limit them more

if you've been going the wrong way, it's by going back to take another direction that you'll reach your destination, not by saying "it's too late, i'll keep going"

what do you think the scientist who are against animal experimentation ask?
to stop right now the waste of time, energy and money and to develop alternative methods instead

but of course, most scientists like to have their grants renewed by saying that the way they've been working is the only one and that consequently their money is justified and that they need more

What methods have I missed that we can use now that will give us more certain results?

maybe you missed that animal experimentation doesn't give certain results at all

i'm not a scientist, so i did what you can do to, i searched "without animal experimentation" in google
on the first page there's a result from [url]http://europa.eu.int [/URL] which i suppose you'll agree should be rather non biased

it says :
" A growing number of alternative solutions are being made available to researchers. Organ, cell and tissue cultures are now commonplace while our improved knowledge of genetics is making it possible to study certain human biochemical mechanisms in micro-organisms. Innovative molecular biology techniques are resulting in the application of tests based on the use of isolated enzymes (some of which have replaced the thousands of rabbits and rats used 25 years ago for pregnancy tests). Physics, mathematics and information technology are also making their contribution to the Three Rs, with imaging techniques, modelling, non-invasive methods of investigation, telemetry and biostatistics helping researchers to learn as much as possible from the data available."

No, I'm saying culture dictates norms and relativity

and reason asks to fight norms when they are unfair

Neither eating meat nor not eating meat is a absolute right

what is wrong with not eating meat?

I'm not talking about one person, I'm talking about people who want to eat meat.

how many people do you think have told me "i would be vegetarian to, but i just can't give up meat"?
honestly i've lost count
but it sure shows me that for most, eating meat is not a decision/wish/plan. it's more of an addiction brought by years of cultural conditioning
so for all these people, the act of will power would be to adjust their behaviour to the ideals they say to agree with

My soul mates? Are you referring to the title of a thread or other people?

i used "soul mate" as short for "the other bluelighters who where posting 'on your side' in the thread"
english is not my language so i may not have the best choice of words sometimes

In case you are "unaware", you do the exact same thing with my points

if you've interpreted wrongly something that i've said 3 times, of course i'm going to correct you 3 times

apart from that, i haven't interpreted your points, i've replied to them