Ah, and almost to illustrate the point perfectly- we just had two people on both extremes of the morality issue.
It's a sad day when eliminating pain and suffering to other animals is considered a moral extreme.
Which is rather unfortunate, because I think the vast majority of people would probably agree that it's possible to consume meat that has been raised and killed in a humane and compassionate manner without any serious moral implications.
The same vast majority of people couldn't explain the ridiculous sentence that contains both words "killed" and "humane" or "compassionate".
But unfortunately, the discussion gets bogged down in the extremes- people who say that the killing of any animal for consumption is just not OK no matter what and those who say it has no relevance whatsoever and don't care how an animal arrives at their table.
Once again, how can the killing of an animal be considered extreme?
Which isn't too bad, because while the moral debate is difficult, the health aspect is not.
Nothing difficult about the moral debate at all. It's compassion and empathy versus selfishness and tastebuds.