Don't Eat Anything With A Face
Topics: Energy, Health
Public Release Date: December 04, 2013
In the last few years, the landscape for people wanting to move away from eating meat or other animal products has changed considerably. A 2023 Gallup poll reported that 4% of Americans said they are vegetarian and 1% vegan. Plant-based meat substitute products have also become increasingly commonplace in grocery stores and restaurants. For those choosing this lifestyle, not eating animals is a moral stance, not a dietary preference. To them, eating animals, fish, or other living creatures is indefensible when plant-based and lab-grown alternatives can provide the same nutrition without pain and slaughter or creating greenhouse gas emissions.
However, those who would rather keep eating animal products argue that humans have evolved as omnivores and that meat has played a vital role in health, culture, and culinary heritage across civilizations. They caution against vilifying meat consumption when responsibly raised livestock can support rural economies, agriculture, and even biodiversity. With the privilege of being able to choose what we want to eat, is continuing to eat animals a personal choice—or an ethical failure?
In this debate, we argue on this motion: Don’t Eat Anything With A Face.
ARGUING YES:
Neal Barnard: Clinical Researcher and Author of ‘21-Day Weight Loss Kickstart’
Gene Baur: President and Co-Founder of the Farm Sanctuary
ARGUING NO:
Chris Masterjohn: Nutritional Sciences Researcher, Blogger at The Daily Lipid
Joel Salatin: Farmer & Author
MODERATOR-IN-CHIEF:
John Donvan: Emmy award-winning journalist