My point was that my proposed wording would say that “they can if they want to” and not “they shouldn’t even if they want to” because that’s what your wording implifies. I added a second sentence because I assumed you may be actually be against drinking milk at all for personal reasons or something.
The dairy industry has a strong lobby. There’s no reason to drink milk from a cow or any other non-human animal.
Ask yourself “Am I a baby cow?” If the answer is “No”, then you shouldn’t be drinking cows’ milk.
Are you an animal of prey? No? Then you shouldn’t be eating lamb’s meat.
No argument here.
Humans are predators though? In the “wild” as it were, our species are omnivorous persistence hunters.
So we can eat anything? Even…milk???
I feel like “shouldn’t have to” would be better than “shouldn’t be”. Unless I misunderstood your point and you meant to say it that way.
No, because that would imply that people have to drink milk…and they don’t.
My point was that my proposed wording would say that “they can if they want to” and not “they shouldn’t even if they want to” because that’s what your wording implifies. I added a second sentence because I assumed you may be actually be against drinking milk at all for personal reasons or something.
Taking someone’s milk without their consent is immoral, and cows can’t consent.
Milking is a relief to cows u utter doughnut brain.
How do you think they feel about being forcibly impregnated over and over and over again? And having their children taken away from them each time?
Cows don’t have agency. Also you just moved the goalposts from milking to forced pregnancy.
Correct. That’s my point.
Cows don’t produce milk unless they’re kept pregnant. You can’t have one without the other.