No fictional animals or xenos were harmed in the making of this post.
Ahh PETA. Vermin, scum, tyrants, evil mother fuckers. Not because they kill 90% of their rescues Not because they steal pets and kill them Not because they flat out make up shit and then cry about being caught out Not because they literally kill puppies and kittens NSFW/L They are evil because their stated goals are to end pet ownership and make every human a vegan. And I am not joking PETA are scum. They are a virtue-signalling factory that does terrible things in the background while putting up an almost religious facade of "if you hate us you hate animals!" They are the Westboro Baptist Church of animal rights organizations, only the WBC at least knows they are a joke.
what other end game could there be? If you challenge the fact that humans are here above all other animals, then your only recourse is neuturing; depriving the future of what you conceive of a great suffering. They see an operating holocaust in every supermarket, poor simple cunts.
If you refer to arguing with people who have little chance of changing their mind, I do it all the time online. Ranging from the racist subs on voat, the vegan subs on reddit, and other "mystical belief subs". The problem is people assume a single argument is enough to spark change. People become defensive and cut off in the course of an argument they are losing, and resort to commonly repeated phrases and terms to defend themselves. What debate does is ignite a spark, and if the fuel is there, it will grow into something more, even if it takes months, or even years, to do so. Arguing with pigeon's are absolutely worth it, because the pigeon, after strutting around on the board, does understand it didn't really win.
It's like a brickwall of nebulous, ever changing logic. You would argue point A, they'd argue point B, you'd get them to understand point B is dumb, they'd start arguing point C with bits of point A sprinkled in as long as it supports them. Then they'd grab random ass talking points to back them up on certain things like "regulations won't improve industrial farming because that same logic allows municipalities to put fluoride in the water for mind control and promoting bone spur growth." Yes. That was a real argument. No, I don't understand what that means.