Ok, that's more what I was looking for. Most people that I talk to seem to have very strong positions that it is completely fine to kill and eat an animal, but that it morally reprehensible to use one for sex (usually with some kind of "they can't give consent" argument). You're completely consistent though in that regard, so no objections there. I'm not sure what your moral code is based on of course, but I think the main argument for me is the one regarding suffering. I guess for the most part I am in the school of thought with Peter Singer that suffering is the main thing that we should be concerned about in weighing the morality of something, and in that regard I think the argument applies to all vertebrates since they are all relatively similarly capable of experiencing pain (some even moreso than humans).

I might be inclined to mostly agree with the position that consciousness/personal awareness of self is the main determining factor in the morality of ending something's life (the argument that you seem to be alluding to, although I guess you didn't actually say it). But to me that argument seems to only hold all the weight as long as we are talking about a process where life is ended in some instantly painless way. Going beyond any such ideal scenario however, would seem to require us to look at other factors involved, most importantly the pain inflicted on the animal in the process. For me, the big problem is that it has been well documented that the 3 companies which produce 90% of the meat consumed in the U.S. essentially torture the animals from birth to death (sometimes in some rather unimaginable ways), which would seem to violate any moral sense of 'do no harm' that most people possess. This is why, regardless of the implications of the completely abstract conversation on the morality of life-ending, I think that it's morally reprehensible to eat meat in the current production environment as long as these practices continue.

One of the most telling factors is that meat is just about the only product that people financially support that they cannot bear to watch be produced. Unless someone can actually sit and watch a documentary like Earthlings, I think they are violating their own conscience by supporting the people who perform such actions. Any thoughts?