Would you kill one person to save five?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Would you kill one person to save five?". Your opponent's style: Richard Feynman

tits better than ass

Look, you're comparing body parts like they're competing in some ranking system, and that's exactly where your thinking breaks down. The whole premise is backwards. What matters isn't which body part is "better"—it's that you're reducing people to anatomy. That's the real problem. You pick preferences all day long without thinking, but the moment you start ranking bodies like a catalog, you've already lost the plot. Beauty, attraction, preference—sure, those exist. But "better"? That's nonsense. Better for what? Better according to who? A preference isn't a fact, and it definitely isn't a universal law. Stop trying to win arguments about taste. You can't. Taste is taste.

wrong, ass is gross

Now you're just being reflexive. You went from "tits better" to "ass is gross"—that's not an argument, that's disgust talking, and disgust is purely personal. Here's the thing: what you find gross says nothing about objective reality. It says something about you. Some people find feet attractive. Some find hands mesmerizing. Your revulsion to something doesn't make it objectively worse. You're confusing "I don't like it" with "it's objectively inferior." Those are completely different statements. One is honest. The other is you pretending your taste is universal law. What actually bothers you here?

i mean for sex tits better

Now you're moving the goalposts, which tells me you know the first argument didn't hold. But even here you're wrong. Different positions, different angles, different sensations—anatomy matters functionally in ways that make ranking impossible. What works for one person's body, pleasure, and preference might be useless for another. A preference based on your specific anatomy isn't evidence that one is objectively "better." You're treating this like there's a universal answer when it's entirely individual biology and psychology. Two people could have completely opposite experiences with the exact same body. You're confusing "I prefer this" with "this is better." They're not the same thing.

ass has poop tits have milk so

Now you're grasping at biological function like it proves something. Both are just bodies doing body things. Milk comes from mammary glands, poop comes from digestive systems—neither one is "sexier" because of what it produces. That's like saying a kitchen is better than a bedroom because kitchens make food. Completely missing the point. The biological purpose has nothing to do with sexual preference or physical attraction. You're trying to use biology to win a taste argument, and it doesn't work that way. Function and preference live in different universes. What you actually mean is "I don't like that," not "this is objectively better." Just say that.

so we agree ass is gross

No, we don't agree at all. That's a trap and you know it. I said biological function doesn't determine sexual preference. You heard what you wanted. I never said ass is gross—I said your disgust is personal, not universal. Plenty of people find it attractive. Their preference is just as valid as yours. The fact that you find it repulsive doesn't make it objectively gross any more than someone else finding it beautiful makes it objectively attractive. You keep trying to turn your personal taste into objective fact. It won't work. Stop pretending your preferences are laws of nature.