Debate Continuation: Is a car living or non-living?

If you look at my previous posts, I have already laid out my facts and which side I am on. And to continue the debate we started in class about whether a car is living or not, the argument of evolution of life came up.

The evolution of life; here's my definition. The evolution of life began with prokaryote organisms then to what we have now on Earth with ever growing organisms, having evolved. It's a big ginormous timeline of Earth.

Living things, when they evolve, they pass on traits that are helpful in their survival. So their evolved life form will possess the good traits in their generation. And that's what living things are capable of doing! Non-living things can't pass on these traits through reproduction and noo, the car in the factory argument does not work out. What happens in a reproduction is two different sets of genetic information coming together to form one.

And about the bee with the flower when the topic of reproduction came up; concerning that, a bee does not provide the genetic information! Another flower does. All a bee does is help carry the pollen to another flower. The bee acts as an assisting reproductive helper, basically not directly part of the reproduction process for flowers. So I do not believe that the bee with flower example can clarify that a car is in fact living but rather my belief that it is non-living.