Eating animal meat purely for pleasure is unethical.

I would like my opponent to clear up a few things, such as what exactly he constitutes as meat. Some people include or dont include Fish. First off, I shall address my opponents arguments paragraph by paragraph: "From where do rights flow? " How far should we be willing to extend the rights to, and to which animal? How much pain should an animal be able to feel, until it is illegal to kick or hurt such an animal? Although it is arguable that Clams feel less pain than Chickens, until my opponent provides detailed descriptions as to how much pain an animal could potentially feel in order to provide certain rights, this first paragraph is pretty much moot. "At the dawn of the agricultural revolution" And we can also suppliment vegetables with pills and vitamins galore. The claim that a human needs Vegetables to survive is also demonstrably false and any thinking person within a mile of a vitamin wearhouse should not take it seriously. My point? Thanks to modern medicine, we can supplement, pretty much, our entire diet. This, however, changes nothing to the fact that there is no good reason we should. "Our own desire to eat meat" Ah, my opponent has decided to extend the rights given to humans, to animals. This results in many problems. First off, there are pets who eat meat. Many dog chows are made of meat. If it is unethical to kill millions of conscious creatures in order to feed your dog, what do you feed it? Secondly, we can suppliment a wolf or tigers main foodsource, which is meat. So, does this mean it is unethical for a wolf to eat a deer? "I am not arguing that there is" What about people who are simply too poor to afford the suppliments for meat? What about people who are unable to eat vegetables because all they have is access to meat? What about the millions of farmers who make their livings, albeit poorly, off of selling meat? Your alternative, provides many problems. Who is going to pay the farmers to start their vegetable gardens, teach them how to cultivate it? Who is going to pay the people who are unable to afford vegetable or medicinal supplements? You? "The ad hoc argument that man was created in the image of God" I agree wholly, as i am not a christian, and therefore will not pull God out in this debate. "Some will try to argue" This is the problem though. Even if, say, Half of the current meat-consuming population, suddenly stopped buying meat, what do you think the farmers would do? Would they simply release the animals, their precious resource, into the wild? Or would they simply slaughter most of the animals, carve them up, and either freeze them or saturate the markets with extremely cheap meat, or try and sell them on the international market? After all, it would be most cost effective to kill most of the livestock in order to avoid feeding them. Also, the cheating on Federal Tax can be applied to this too. If every single person stopped eating meat, the result would be disasterous not only to the economy, as meat produce is a large part of the economy, but also the lives of the farmers who rely on the market to survive. "Others will contend that humans deserve special rights" This is, again, running into the problem of what rights should we extend to animals, and to what animals? I mean, a fly is an animal. It feels pain. Should someone be charged with murder, if they swat one? Should someone go to jail after accidentally stepping on a snail? If a dog kills a man, does the dog deserve the right to a fair trial and a lawyer? If a horse kills another horse, does that Horse get charged with Murder? If you think this is absurd, and that i am somehow arguing a Slippery Slope fallacy, Congratulations! You have agreed that humans have certain rights, certain special rights that are not afforded to other animals! "We would do well to reflect on what Jesus of Nazareth said" Interesting how you disregard an argument from the bible, but at the end, use a plea from the bible as an argument to back up your claim. Anyways, no. It is absurd to let animals have the same rights as humans. I would like to have a proper trial, if i were accused of Murder. I would like the RIGHT to have a lawyer. I would like the RIGHT to a jury of my peers. Should we extend these rights to animals? Really? Now, a few arguments from myself: A fly is sentient. It is self aware. It feels pain(1). Therefore, is it ethically wrong to swat a fly for your own selfish pleasure? As in, if the fly was a nuisance and you killed it? Also, is it unethical to eat things that come from animals, like eggs, or Butter? Source: 1. . http://www.sciencedirect.com...