Here's a controversial one (which I raise for the purposes of discussion and not because I necessarily agree with it). Given that it seems to be agreed that animals on their way to, and also in, the slaughterhouse suffer distress and pain and given that human beings don't have to eat meat (since there are plenty of healthy alternatives) then the only difference between fox-hunting and meat-eating is a matter of degree (since both take place for the purpose of giving humans pleasure). And, if this is true, then the majority of those opposed to fox-hunting (who, presumably, are meat-eaters) are simply being hypocritical.
i dont agree with andy hughes,animals are killed for pleasure the pleasure of people eating meat.and being a veggie is not a fad,iv been one for 24 years.
theres realy no excuse for eating meat,theres plenty of other options.it seems to me that meat eaters have to attack veggies to justify there own guilt.its just pure greed.well there is now over 7million vegetarians in this country and growing by the day.quorn alone is outselling some types of meat.
What's so wrong with eating meat? If we assume (just for argument's sake) that the animals don't suffer then what's the difference between eating a cow that used to be alive and eating a cucumber that used to be alive?
Excuse my ignorance but I don't think anyone's pinned this down.