if you eat meat, you do not care about animals

"praying for animals does not excuse their suffering. That is the least amount of compassion humanly possible. Compassion is a natural reaction to death, it is an egotistical feeling. It does not show empathy for the animal you are consuming."Lack of sources. Again, this is totally unsubstantiated.Obviously wrong, too. The least amount of compassion would be "none". You admit there is compassion in prayer.Merriam-Webster's dictionary states:Full Definition of COMPASSION : sympathetic consciousness of others' distress together with a desire to alleviate it (source: http://www.merriam-webster.com... )There is thus nothing egotistical in compassion, it is sympathetic. Which is - oh surprise - a synonym for empathetic (source: http://www.thesaurus.com... )Hence, by its very definition, compassion is an expression of empathy.For the symptoms of a lack of B12:"Vitamin B12deficiency can be slow to develop, causing symptoms to appear gradually and intensify over time. It can also come on relatively quickly. Given the array of symptoms it can cause, the condition can be overlooked or confused with something else. Symptoms may include: strange sensations, numbness, or tingling in the hands, legs, or feet difficulty walking (staggering, balance problems) anemia a swollen, inflamed tongue yellowed skin (jaundice) difficulty thinking and reasoning (cognitive difficulties), or memory loss paranoia or hallucinations weakness fatigue" from: http://www.health.harvard.edu...And if we look at the physical state Gandhi was in, we clearly see that he was malnourished to the brink of death.As for the others:Shaw ate "lots of eggs", according to the vegetarian site http://www.ivu.org... , which provided him with B12Eggs are allegedly "vegetarian", but they are comprised of animal proteins and nutrients. Which only strengthens the point that we need animal nutrients to survive.You may claim that eating eggs does not generate suffering, but are we not stealing the unborn of birds? Do those not grieve, maybe? And is it not odd that I, who allegedly does not care about animals, have these thoughts, while you - dear opponent - take a man who made a diet which was funding cage-keeping hens as an example of a responsible life-style? Hypocrisy is what I call this.Goodall, in this day and age, most probably takes B12 supplements, as all responsible vegetarians do.Says Jack Norris, from veganhealth.org:"While true that, at the time they become vegan, some people have enough B12 stored in their liver to prevent overt B12 deficiency for many years, people often misinterpret this to mean that you only need to consume a tiny amount once every few years. Actually, to build up such stores, it takes years of consuming B12 beyond one's daily needs (unless you are using supplements which can build up stores more quickly). Some people do not have large enough stores of B12 to be relied upon for optimal health even for short periods."from: http://www.veganhealth.org...He goes on to advise at least weekly high doses of B12.Now, Edna Parker is another story:"When Edna Parker of Indiana died at age 115, Governor Mitch Daniels was impressed by her diet: Parker especially enjoyed eggs, sausage, bacon and fried chicken. “I guess we’ll have to rethink lard,” Daniels quipped after hearing about her high-fat diet."from: http://perfecthealthdiet.com...And what that makes my opponent is a big fat liar.Now Thiamine, B1, can indeed be found in many sources.Not so B12, which is what we're talking about here. Whatever the purpose of this distraction tactic, it doesn't help. A strictly vegetarian diet is harmful without B12 supplements.Now, for those:Those are produced microbially. Microbes are living beings, and I have just the prejudiced example how hypocritically vegetarians claim that microbes may suffer:"Therefore, not only has the first condition – assuming sentience – not been satisfied, but the case of bacteria, as it relates to the second condition, is markedly different than that of consuming meat: some types of bacteria kill human beings; and unlike any other situation between nonhumans and most humans, in our day-to-day lives bacteria cannot simply be avoided – they exist all around us, all the time. How many bears do you encounter while watching television? Is your “struggle” with the birds of this world tooth-and-nail? Such encounters are easily avoidable, while bacterial infections, or colds, the flu, etc. are common: in these situations there exists a true conflict of a most fundamental sort – health, life – whereby some harm, assuming that bacteria can be “harmed,” is justifiable. Of the billions of nonhumans we murder or torture annually, none present a threat of harm to you – it’s laughable to suggest otherwise."http://www.vegansoapbox.com... That is what happens if someone corners vegans about harvesting, farming and using bacteria: another "Appeal to the extremes"-fallacy. What it all comes down to is this: which life-forms vegetarians eat/abuse or not is totally arbitrary. It serves JUSTIFICATION, so that they won't have to feel bad about eating meat. I frown at the ease with which vegetarians declare all life they want to eat non-sentient and lack any and all compassion for those. Suddenly, double-standards arise, like declaring ALL bacteria legitimate targets for exploitation because SOME want to kill us. Guess what? SOME animals kill humans, too. And I would NEVER sink so low as to use that for justification. We all live off the death of other life. Making a difference only works by making a difference in how we treat the animals while they live. And out of compassion, as I declared as a meat-eater already, I only eat meat that comes from animals that had a decent life. Most vegetarians eat eggs without ever asking from where they came. That's far more uncaring than what I do. I take responsibility for eating meat, and my prayer serves to teach my child respect for life. Not guilt, because that's unnecessary. Vegetarians run from guilt. While I accept that burden: animals die so my family will be sustained. It's natural. And we're part of nature. No need to run from that.Humans can - as omnivores - indeed get nutrients from plants and meat. But since plants do not contain B12, there's nothing to get from there, and there's no justifiable reason why we should let our children suffer from B12 deficiency in order to spare the occasional animal an untimely death."Also, chickens, cows and sheep do not pose a threat to our lives, either." They don't have to in order for us to eat them in accordance with the laws of nature. Again, ONE condition is enough. We kill them in order to eat, and that's how every predator does it. And how every herbivore s about eating plants, too. Kill to eat. Legit. The allegedly unique case of the woman in my example gets to show that it is possible to eat meat and feel guilt. Which my opponent claimed was impossible. Post-hoc nonsense, there. I also want to point out that my opponent left lots of my points unaddressed, and I extend all of those. I thank the audience for their time reading and judging this.