That is a fallacious argument. Food stealing (which you said) and food replication (which would be the fair equivalent) are different things, as are book stealing and book replication. I&#x27;m not making any judgements about neither of those, just pointing out the false equivalency.<p>Would you oppose if someone managed to buy just one single piece of food, then replicate it at a molecular level and at virtually no cost, and distribute it for free to the whole world, so that no one would ever have to starve ever again?<p>&quot;Of course you can champion public food banks, and simultaneously oppose food replication and sharing. Don&#x27;t be ridiculous!
All it takes is either illogical, inconsistent thinking, or logically invalid thinking. There&#x27;s no barrier to either of these, in theory or practice.&quot;