The Slaughter of Animals for the Consumption of Meat Ought to Cease

I apologize for not responding in the second round. This site is relatively new to me, and I didn't check in as often as I should have. My opponent offers forceful and cogent evidence in favor of their position. However, I think I can dismantle or at least weaken each of their arguments. Moral Consistency My first observation on this point is that, in the first paragraph my opponent attempts to settle a question that has long been debated and which continues to be controversial. The question of how to define human life and to measure its value is complicated, and is not settled with an appeal to our intuitions about our own worth. It is true that many philosophers have held that our experiences and emotions are what make us unique -- the profundity of our perceptions and the complexity of our feelings is unrivaled in the animal kingdom, though animals do find their place along this continuum. So if we embrace this model, my opponent's point is perfectly legitimate. However, my adversary dismisses the many other theories about human life which do not lend themselves to translation to the animal kingdom. Those for whom belief in God is the foundation of human value would disagree that animals are worth a fraction of what humans are; they would say that humans are qualitatively (not quantitatively) different from animals, and any attempts to compare them numerically is spurious. Not only would many religions reject my opponent's reasoning, but some secular philosophers -- like the German scholar Schopenhauer -- would say that self-awareness, imagination, and the ability to engage in abstract thought (traits that animals likely lack) are what distinguish us from the animal and plant kingdoms. I do not seek to settle this question, but only to offer alternatives to my opponent's views which s/he must refute in order to put through this argument from moral consistency. Food I do not contest that the mass breeding and slaughtering of animals for human consumption is a wasteful process, which is counter to humans' caloric interests. Let us, however, look closely at the contention under debate; my opponent must support the claim that ALL slaughter ought to cease, not just on a massive scale but also on the scale of a farmer killing one of his chickens to garnish the Christmas table or a rancher sacrificing a cow in order to save money to pay rent. In these examples, the decision of individuals to kill and eat an animal is not putting additional strain on the environment, or wasting valuable farmland and preventing the cultivation of crops. Diseases Again, I agree that vegetarians, when compared to meat-eaters, are generally more healthy individuals. However, the burden of proof that my opponent is bound to through the phrasing of the proposition under debate does not allow such an easy victory. My esteemed adversary must demonstrate that the consumption of meat is NEVER beneficial to one's health. The very same doctors applauding vegetarianism admit that certain meats, like mutton or pork, when eaten in extreme moderation, can improve health and even reverse the deleterious effects of some diseases, like muscle-wasting disorders that require large amounts of protein and nutrients that are rare in vegetables but which some meats plentifully provide. The Taste I do not feel the need to address this point, because my opponent is not offering it in an effort to establish their case, but as a preemptive rebuttal of an argument I might have offered. However, since the burden of proof rests on their shoulders and I thus need only defeat their arguments to be successful, I see no need to advance any arguments of my own. Conclusion My opponent makes several good points (though, clearly, I don't think they're compelling). In every case, I think my opponent either fails to account for the breadth of the contention under discussion, or ignores widely-held theories that weaken their position in favor of weak appeals to intuition. I thank my adversary, and my readers, and look forward to a strong response.