… in eating meat takes precedence over the non-moral welfare interests of animals. If this
strategy works, then we have a basis for putting our own welfare interests over the welfare …

… the vast majority of meat in the United States and in many other countries … meat endangers
life because no other food is available, the duty no longer applies. In this case, eating meat to …

… demonstrates that the choice to eat meat is a factor in environmental destruction, animal …
individuals who continue to habitually eat meat. movements come in waves, and hostility exists …

… In fact, if it were acceptable to use this gambit, we could just say “In principle it is immoral
to eat meat but in practice, it is not,” and not bother with the tough mental work needed to …

… believe that eating meat is natural – that eating meat is written in our biology, … eating meat
is necessary – that we need meat for survival or that we need to consume at least some meat …

… In this article, Professor Engel advances an argument for the immorality of eating meat. …
provide me with clear moral reasons for not eating meat, I will continue to eat what I please. …

… eating meat can be permissible. I think there clearly are cases where eating meat is
permissible—eating a deer killed in a … The case against meat presented here hinges on how, in …

… Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain … in a
retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in …

… Most people don’t think about animals or feel bad when eating meat; it is just an everyday
part of life. This may in part be true, and we suggest that the ways in which we naturally tend to …

… Two centuries later, the Franklin approach reappears in the work of a leading environmental
ethicist, who argues that the choice to eat meat can be rationalized if we “recognize and …