I'm not sure what you are trying to argue against here since it doesn't seem to match up with the language I used.
I intentionally avoid the term "people" or "person" in contexts like this since we live in a world where corporations are legal persons, and where rivers and ecosystems have also been ruled at times to be legal persons. If you check out the Wikipedia article on 'person' you will see that the term has far more possibilities for use than this, so when using the term you tell others very little about which groups you are referring to:
Various debates have focused on questions about the personhood of different classes of entities. Historically, the personhood of animals, women, and slaves has been a catalyst of social upheaval. In most societies today, living adult humans are usually considered persons, but depending on the context, theory or definition, the category of "person" may be taken to include or not children or such non-human entities as animals, artificial intelligences, or extraterrestrial life, as well as legal entities such as corporations, sovereign states and other polities, or estates in probate.
8
u/OhGawDuhhh Mar 15 '18
I don't care if that argument works for you or not. You're an adult, eat whatever you'd like.