Paradigm 1. Animals are awesome. Wanton killing is wrong.
Paradigm 2. Killing animals for food is OK provided the animal is killed humanely, the food is not wasted, and the animal is revered for its contribution.
Most people are able to do this. Some of them get lazy with the part about reverence, because the supermarket puts animals and the life cycle process out of sight and out of mind, hence there are few triggers for reverence.
Similarly, it is possible to use animals for scientific research and to value and respect animals. It requires the holding of two paradigms simultaneously. These paradigms are more difficult to state than in the case of carnivorous food above.
Those two paradigms can be boiled down to “Animals are pretty objects that I can kill and eat if I so desire.” It’s the polar opposite of reverence.
What you say I think and feel is not an accurate representation of what I think and feel. It is an indication of what you think and feel.
And the majority of animal research is on pre-clinical treatments for human diseases.
I've always been amazed at how animal rights activists target scientists over the animal farming industry.
Which in my opinion is the real weakness of this proposal. You won't find me destroying something I consider awesome unless I'm actually starving.
I get that there are a lot of aspects to modern life that sterilize the gruesomeness of reality. Still makes me uncomfortable when the illusion is peeled back and I catch a glimpse.