Seeing how many spelling errors you made, I can’t say that was copy-paste from a reliable source, no :D?

But, but a dead animal is still an ecosystem of living molecules and cells, until the mass has broken into smaller beings, right?

Only an animal is capable of two forms:
*Motility – Has a nervous system, allowing consciousness, and has voluntary movement.
*Sessility – Has a nervous system, allowing consciousness, but has no voluntary movement.

When a motile animal dies, it remains sessile until rotted into dead cells, and smaller organisms.

Surely, in biology, you did realise that every cell is a seperate, living entity, and you just happen to be a collection of seperately living, entity cells, in control by periphreal engineering, even more cells, who’s special purpose is to keep you alive, and the nervous system keeps you in good communication with electronic messages.

All animal cells are capable of reproduction via the use of biological mortality; those who don’t reproduce, are immortal, unless diffused into smaller, living particles; it depends if they are subject to the Hayflick limit, or not.

Chromosomes that have telomeres either end, will split into smaller and smaller organisms, as they reproduce, and it gives the impression they are rotting away, until the chromosomes are of a molecular scale, when they are no longer affected by cellular division, yet, they are made of energy, so are still living, wow, that’s incredible, isn’t it?

Wow, so we’re all like planets; how small does the intrinsics go, before the actual entities are reached? Wow, so it is infinite inwards, as it is, out? Yet we only think of ourselves made of atoms, and life exists only if you have a brain.

Ok, despite the amazement from me, by the ‘how life works’ article.

I can now deliver the conclusion…
Everything is alive, and possibly dividing (try to emulate multiplication), via ’spreading’.

Yet, this is only how life works on Earth.

If every atom is alive, an immortal to the smallest scale, why do we look upon ‘death’ as bad, well the obvious answer is ‘would you like to die’, ‘more lifeforms die, the bigger the entity’, ‘those with nervous systems feel’ and ‘a primary cell has worked hard obtaining leadership of a whole animal body’.

I think I might change my religion now, that’s an amazing concept.

Ok, back to the article, if you have sex with a dead animal, you’re not having sex with a motile, you’re having sex with a sessile!

So, remember, whenever you eat meat, let it rot, and/or burn it, you’re condemning millions of innocent cells, right? Now I am depressed.

Why not give ’sessile’ and ‘particles’, rights, then :D?

This certainly will make the Buddhists even more careful what they tread on ?:D.

Well you give silly article, I give silly answer.

A huge percentage of opportunist necrophiles, resort to any species, any age, any disease; they just like it, but they pose a threat to gaining something like Ebola or something.

So I think ‘yuck’ comes to the right place.

The same goes to rubbish fuckers…

Thank you for reading my comments.

I’m not even going to touch this..

Demon,

a dead dog or deer is not a living being, it cannot reproduce, and does not breathe. Therefore it is not an animal.

there crime is the same as masturbating with a steak. i know no law against using meat as a masturbation toy.