Can you explain why you think there's a sense of moral superiority to not wanting to kill animals? Yes, vegans still kill other forms of life which are believed not to be sentient. But even if they were sentient and felt pain, it takes a lot more plants to feed animals than to eat plants directly. The ratio is 10 to 1. So if one is sincerely concerned about reducing harm to plants, it'd still make more sense to eat plants than feeding them to animals in order to eat the animals.

The morality angle is typically what's used to convert people to veganism(?). Regardless, the "it's not sentient" response doesn't really convince me at all, given that there's varying levels of sentience. At what point is it okay to kill and eat? Seems like an arbitrary distinction. If they can't recognize themselves, does that mean it's a-okay? Or perhaps it's just when you can't distinguish whether they can feel pain? No matter how you draw the line, it's completely arbitrary and not a real distinction. As far as plants being eaten by animals, which I then eat, I realize that. It's not somehow more moral to cut out the middle man (or middle pig). I have no qualms with eating anything. I don't see it as morally wrong, just like I don't see 'survival of the fittest' as being morally wrong.

Understood. No one likes preachers. Does this mean that you won't act if you ever come across some unfair cruelty which could be avoided? This is how animal rights activists feel. They see this humongous unfair cruelty going on and feel frustrated that it's taboo to even mention it unless asked. I understand that currently killing animals for food is a common thing and therefore everyone has the personal choice. Similarly in the past we've had attitudes such as slavery and female oppression, which today we find unacceptable. If no one ever stood up for the discrimination around them, things would never change. There'd be no history.

Eating an animal is completely different than having unequal rights between the same species. The equivalent to slavery or female oppression would be specifically setting aside certain pigs that aren't going to be eaten, and then eat the rest. Similarly, I'd have no problem with eating people, if the need arose. However, my views towards equal rights supersedes my dietary preferences, and on top of that eating a human is rather difficult. As far as animal cruelty goes, I don't particularly see it as my problem, but it's not like I'd choose it directly. Similarly, I don't like to "mess with people", or prank them, or w/e. It's along the same lines IMO.

But to try and relate eating animals as a 'barbaric' act, similar to slavery is absurd. And the logical extreme would be to not eat any living thing; including plants or bacteria. As I mentioned before, eating living things is necessary for survival. Torturing living things is not.

If you want to extend the 'you don't need to eat living things' even further, you could argue that simply living and existing is consuming resources, which directly hinders another living thing's ability to live.

Yes, humans are capable of digesting meat but just because we can do something does it mean we should? Human teeth are definitely not predator teeth. Just compare your canines with those of a feline. Here's a full physical comparison:

"Should" isn't the question. I don't do something simply because I'm able to. As for the chart, I'm wondering if you could provide a chart/info from an unbiased source, seeing as that particular chart has clear connections to the vegetarian side of things (the name, the Facebook group, etc). One that doesn't try to argue a particular side would be much easier to accept. Either way, from my knowledge, don't vegans/vegetarians need supplements or w/e to stay healthy? Or is that misinformation? Regardless, I don't see anything wrong with my current food choices. Which include other 'unhealthy' or potentially not favorable to humans. Like donuts :). And once again, by arguing for a plant-based diet, you are in the same grounds morally, IMO. As I see humans, plants, animals, and every other living thing as the same: a living organism that exists in this world under the natural laws.

In the past we've had to do plenty of things to survive which we don't do today. Also we didn't have science and an understanding of human dietary requirements. In an age when we know that we can live healthily without subjugating or killing other creatures, why should we choose to? Especially when animal farming is such a big contributor of green house gases causing climate change.

I don't see any problem with something like synthetic meats. Granted, we aren't quite there yet. As far as climate change, cars are also a big factor. I take it that you own a car? I don't. I walk where I need to go (or carpool with someone who's driving that way anyway). But if you are going to argue for something, you need to be sure your entire views line up. Otherwise it's just silly. Though I'd definitely like to see the numbers. I'm curious how much modern animal farming has contributed, in comparison to early farming and without farming as well.

If you feel it's not morally wrong killing animals for human enjoyment, how do you feel about certain countries killing dogs or cats for meat? Can you see the biased emotional attachment that we have towards animals we have designated as pets and animals which we have placed outside of moral consideration?

I have no problems with eating a dog or cat. I wouldn't eat my own pet, but that's like saying I wouldn't eat my brother. If it came down to it, I probably would. But given the choice, I don't see a reason to harm those that are close to me. A random cat? Or one that was grown to be eaten? Sure. I have no problems with that.

As I said, people aren't out of the question either. The only reason I wouldn't, is due to the obvious rights issue that arises. If I say "yes, it's fine to eat my species" that directly places me in the line of food. And seeing as people as a whole are cognitive and creative creatures (as compared to other living things), it's best to let things lie where they are.

Again, I think anyone is free to broadcast whatever they want, that's called free speech. You don't have to listen to them and you certainly don't have to reply, you can even block them online. However if everyone that has views that go against the status-quo, followed your advice and didn't speak up, things would never change. Have you asked yourself why is it that this subject upsets you?

Nah, I have no problems with them saying as they please. But there's a time and a place. The problem arises when someone lets it dominate their entire worldview and they can't shut up about it. It's not so much that I don't want to hear it (I'm always up for a valid and consistent view that's different from my own), it's that I don't want to hear people nag about my preferences and opinions when I'm trying to eat.

I don't start blabbing to people about how spicy food is actually bad for you, how it destroys tastebuds, and how it's just awful in general. I don't like it, I don't eat it, and if asked, I'll talk about it. But that doesn't mean I need to bring it up whenever there's a bit of silence.

It "upsets me" because people are thinking they are taking the moral high ground, without realizing their own view is self-contradictory, as well as morals being entirely subjective. As I said, I have no problem with people having certain diets or w/e. Just mention it if it's an issue (group meal or something), and perhaps if we are talking about food then bring it up.

It's just annoying when a conversation goes like this:

"Hey, I'm hungry, want to go eat?"

"Sure, but keep in mind i'm vegan, so we need to go somewhere that works for me."

"Alright, how about X?"

"Can't do there, they serve meat and support slavery and slaughter of livestock"

"FFS dude, they have vegan and vegetarian meals! How about Y?"

"Nah, same problem. But these guys hate gays as well!"

etc.

It's a matter of interjecting it at every possible moment to try and take a moral high ground. And that bothers me regardless of what you are trying to say. Have a problem with gendered pronouns? Same fucking thing. Have a problem if I use specific words? Again, same thing. Maybe bring it up if it's a sensitive or important issue, but no need to try and take a moral high ground when we are just having a conversation about something unrelated, or are just trying to get a bite to eat.

Here's the video I linked (it's unrelated to the vegetarian/veganism thing), I'm not sure why it's not showing up. I tried as a text link this time, instead of embedding it. So hopefully that works.