I have no ill will against those who wish to be vegetarians; however, I can say that there seems to be something unsocial wrought by the exclusion of certain amino acids which exist only in meat. That aside, I have always found the argumentation used in support of vegetarianism, from suggesting pro-meat additions to Scripture, to “eat nothing with faces” a bit puerile. Your whole worldview centers around what you eat and what you do not eat? That sounds more like foodie snobbery than deep-seated conviction.
The dietary laws in Judaism served to set the people apart from the various other groups they lived among. Islam, borrowing and corrupting Judaism, at least purports to use dietary laws for the same purpose. The canard of “eat nothing with faces” has no holiness associated with it; the suspicion of meat and all the hysteria about it has no theological backing. At the best, it is a self-interested call to better oneself. Attempts to graft some kind of metaphysical superstructure on to foodie snobbery end up in the petered-out land of neo-paganism. This puts the vegetarian at odds with all of Western civilization; that they side with the losers of history only fuels their martyrdom complex and sense of persecution which they have brought completely on themselves.
But what about “meat is murder”? Well, what about it? It is an emotional claim, not a logical claim. If meat is murder, then murder doesn’t mean much. Murder is a term that means the unjustified taking of human life, and it does not mean the simple ending of human life (Thou shalt not murder – not thou shalt not kill). Even PETA doesn’t get much traction by following that logic trail to its risible “Holocaust on your plate” ads. So it’s pretty clear that vegetarians bandy about this catchphrase for emotive reasons, not because they actually believe “a rat is a pig is a dog is a boy.” Few people believe that.
When pressed, I think even vegetarians would chose to the end the life of a wolf rather than a human, but there lies the soft underbelly of the philosophy: most vegetarians have no exposure to wild animals. They live in a relatively safe cities, where they have more to fear from their fellow man than a black bear, for instance. At the best, they can nip at the edges of meat consumption by demanding ethical treatment of animals, better inspections of meat processing facilities, and so on, but all of these things do not reduce meat consumption per se; however, they can elevate the cost and that is the goal – to incrementally destroy what someone else wants to do because you think like a child, and believe that a chicken sandwich is the same as dragging someone behind your pickup for a few miles.
Vegetarianism, in its political forms, is another tyranny cult. Very few of the “don’t eat faces” crowd care much about the rights of others. Very few of them think logically. Very few of them get along well with others. When you see this confluence of madness, you have to at least suspect that people are doing something fundamentally at odds with the way they were designed to be.