Probably because you intended it to be a personal attack.
No, it was a serious and valid question about whether he acknowledged the deeper implications of the law that prohibits eating the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate..
ITS THE LAW. Its been around for thousands of years. I didn't write it.
You probably thought it was a personal attack because it applies to you as well. A pretentious fartbag who peddles godflesh for chump change. Now that was ad hominem. The pretentious fartbag comment., not the LAW question.
If you feel that the law, as it is written, insults you maybe now you might understand why the people rebelled against Moses, why they always kill the prophets who remind them of the truths that they rejected, and why the revelation of Jesus Christ has pissed off and embarrassed so many sanctimonious jackasses for centuries.
It is the will of God for people, whether Jew or Gentile, rich or poor, male or female, young or old, healthy or sick, etc., etc., to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.
Its a do or die situation. End of story.
Take your objections and hurt feelings to God and he will send you a plague of poisonous snakes.
I shit you not.