I just think that people who have religious or health related dietary restrictions should be allowed to maintain those restrictions, and that there's a legitimate argument to be made in that scenario. I'm not suggesting that this is a matter of animal cruelty, just that the idea of pushing something that roughly 1/3 of the global population cannot eat as a predominant monoculture product is probably something that that 1/3 of the population is justified in being apprehensive about.
I think this is a rare miss from Emma, but I don't think we need to flame our comrades with this sort of response tbh. She has a point
I just think that people who have religious or health related dietary restrictions should be allowed to maintain those restrictions, and that there's a legitimate argument to be made in that scenario. I'm not suggesting that this is a matter of animal cruelty, just that the idea of pushing something that roughly 1/3 of the global population cannot eat as a predominant monoculture product is probably something that that 1/3 of the population is justified in being apprehensive about.