Respectfully disagree. The writer is vegetarian, and the article is written for omnivores. I think of this as a ‘by vegans, for vegans’ community that others are welcome to be in provided they abide the community rules, like vegan users ought to as well. If this community was for outreach to the veg-curious, I might agree. I don’t feel the opinions map well enough onto how I think of this community to consider pinning it:

Where we draw ethical lines around eating is largely arbitrary

No one has the high moral ground for ethical eating, except maybe the Jains, followers of a nonviolent religion that includes the wearing of masks to avoid accidentally swallowing bugs.

No sooner had I bragged that I don’t contribute to the slaughter of animals than vegans asked me uncomfortable questions about my awareness of dairy and egg farming treatment of cows and chickens. And vegans are ethical bottom feeders compared with fruitarians, who don’t even kill plants for their sustenance. (It should be noted that fruitarianism is generally considered nutritionally unsustainable.)

Then there is the matter of being able to afford a healthy diet that eschews readily available (and yes, subsidized) meat and dairy options. Are any of us who are lucky enough to have enough food in a position to judge those who struggle with food insecurity?

The bottom line is that most of us make choices about how much animal and animal-sourced products we eat, whether for environmental, health or ethical reasons, or for cost and availability, or simply for taste preference.

Consuming less meat and animal products generally means less animal suffering and less of a burden on the planet and maybe one’s personal health. Those are facts, but no one can say where the personal line of consumption should be drawn.

pinned as an example of apologist carnist garbage you mean?