Not only do you jump to an insane straw man.
It wasn't an insane strawman though? It was literally the argument they made. Something has to die for you to eat, therefore it doesn't matter how many things you kill or how necessary those deaths are. The fact that you must kill something absolves you of any guilt for any amount of killing, is the ridiculous argument the person made (and which carnists often make) which we are making fun of for being obviously evil and wrong.
Women are going to be a little late in the morning
I just don't understand why it's necessary to be a nuisance to other people inside their homes at any hour on any day, outside of necessary rare events such as work being done on the house with power tools. I manage to live my life without creating a noise that could conceivably wake someone at any hour of any day more than once a month or two. I view people blasting loud music, letting their dogs bark for hours on end, mowing lawns with deafening machinery, and so on as the equivalent of walking around my house banging pots and pans together. I know you think of it as "necessary" but I assure you that it isn't. You're loud because you don't care about the disturbance you cause people, not because you truly have to be.
Obama was significantly less evil than Biden, who was himself not as competently evil (at the time of his presidency) as Harris is / will be.
Obama picked Biden as his VP in order to shore up the more evil, racist, conservative side of the Democratic party and undecided "moderates." He was a segregationist, a virulent racist, a sexual abuser, and a lifelong monster.
Obama wasn't a good guy either but the trend is definitely toward greater evil.
Alas! Moths.
Exactly! In English! Which this person does not know!
You seem to be getting pretty confused here. We're talking about the literal meanings, that is to say the ones that someone who doesn't have a strong grasp of English should know. Metaphors and idioms and so on are famously difficult for those without a strong grasp on the language, but I am arguing that this is not one of those. This is a phrase with a straightforward literal meaning, unlike such phrases as "pulling your leg."
Or the number of days since their birth? That’s the simpler explanation.
“Those apples are numbered” = “we know how many apples there are right now”
No, that does not make equal literal sense to what I said. Because days that are in the past are gone, we don't have them anymore. We refer to moving through time as "killing" time or as "losing" time, in English we don't tend to think of the past as something we currently have. The future is something we have or will have, the past is something we had and no longer have.
No, it's not a false equivalency at all. It's the natural result of a strategy which begins and ends with "choose the lesser evil" with no regard for the fact that the lesser and greater evil are becoming steadily more evil every single cycle.
This path leads to fascism no matter how you try to spin it.
A lot of us work at night. My bed time is 8am. Why exactly do you deserve sleep more than I do just because I'm on a different equally necessary schedule?
Time to get good with a scythe
If you actually believe harming plants causes them pain and that that is bad, you should be vegan. Animal agriculture harms far, far more plants than any plant agriculture ever could.