Andy F wrote:
>
> > I haven't read Singer, but from the Alternet article it sounds like
> he's is making a point about environmental resource use -- that
> there's not enough to equally share use of animal products among
> humans, plus leaving something for the critters. My fear is that he
> might have a point with that....
I and others on this list has made the following point a number of times. It applies to longterm conditions, not the immediate present, but that seems to be the context of the present thread.
A huge amount of the world's available protein exists in the form of plants (e.g., grass) that the human stomach cannot digest. There also exists huge expanses of the planet (e.g., the Great Plains of North America) which, because of the limits on water supply, should not be plowed but should grow grass only.
Over the long haul, among the consequences of these conditions, are (1) a great _reduction_ of meat in the diet and (2) the continued place of meat as a core part of the human diet, since the protein in grass & other plants only becomes available after being processed through animals. Less meat, much less meat -- no grain fattened cattle -- but never _no_ meat.
This is not a moral issue.
Carrol