> You're driving a car, too fast, and in a moment have to choose Did you really just try to reframe the trolley problem with lambs and rosebushes? So it's not

> You're driving a car, too fast, and in a moment have to choose Did you really just try to reframe the trolley problem with lambs and rosebushes? So it's not an either or. I choose to drive my large heavy vehicles in a very safe and reasonable manner to maximize my chances to avoid running into herds of sheep or other livestock. If I had to choose between livestock and smashing my bumper on a pole, I would choose avoid the livestock of course. If they were headed to market tomorrow, it'd be the same 100%. My children all eat veal and lamb but love roses too and are fairly ambivalent about poles and bumpers. They are not confused by any of this. If I read them your arguments and explained your beliefs, they would also know instantly that you have lead a very sheltered life and would feel a little sorry for you. It isn't really that hard to understand right and wrong. > ditto Well I'm not trying to convince you because you are clearly delusional. I'm pointing out to other, rational, people the gaping flaws in your arguments. I feel that wide-eyed idealistic activists are over-represented in these comments and I'm trying to ensure that nobody forgets that most people don't agree with these positions.