HPI and The New York Times
USA, April 30, 2012 (HPI note): Earlier this month, The New York Times challenged the readers with a question: can you make a compelling case for the ethics of eating meat?
A panel of judges at the newspaper chose the best 6 options, and readers were then invited to vote on the most persuasive one.
It is striking (though perhaps not surprising) that the answer considered most convincing is from a man who does not eat meat at all, and has tasted no animal in more than forty years. But he says he is "about to," because in-vitro meat is just around the corner.
The bottomline from HPI's team? The very best defense for eating meat, it seems, is the hope that, one day, it will not imply in the killing of animals--a feeble and unconvincing argument by any measure.
See the answers here