In this passage, John Mizzoni argues with Holmes Rolston III about why it is not morally allowed to eat meat. He makes an opposition stating fact of eating animals is not nutritionally required to be part of the human life. Another key point John stated eating meat is more of cultural aspect rather nature aspect.
The term nutritional factor is the central support for his debate. Mizzoni emphasize this idea by four main reasons. First reason eating meat goes along with status also known as (meat mystique). Second reason the taste of meat is irresistible. Third reason meat contains protein. Last reason pure convenience many people were brought out of traditions of eating meat.
Mizzoni mentions, “Since eating animals is not required for nutrition, then it would count as luxury, a non-basic need.” I disagree with this statement like it or not, plants are also living organisms that responding to stimuli like touch. Thus killing plants is also destructive demise of destroying a huge part of the ecosystem. In like manner, Mizzoni stated, “20,000 birds of paradise, 40,000 hummingbirds, and 30,000 of other species were slaughtered for feathers.” Although this may be true, same argument can go for plants. Similarity, plants are being used in leather, glue, and gelatin. It’s not only animals that are the means of pain, but plants as well.
In the passage Mizzoni points are well supported by certain claims. For instance, “Eating animal is a luxury in which our non-basic needs are prioritized over the basic needs of animals.” Honestly speaking it will take a lot more to change my eating habit. I give respect to animals, but humans will always be dominant. If vegetables were the world diet, many people will lose jobs, and there will be over populations of animals. I agree there shouldn’t be over-hunting and abusing of animals, instead there should be balance at the same time.
-Animals aren’t aware they will die
-Humans separate our instinct from obligations
-Eating animals doesn’t interrupt Culture
-Animals don’t speak the human language
-Humans have to keep the ecosystem stable.
C-There is a moral difference between eating humans and animals.
FootNotes:
Passage:Against rolston Defense of Eating Animals by John Mizzoni
Atef Chisty Philosophy 
I agree with your quote because I think any living thing has some sort of emotions and has some sort of reaction.
I agree with you that we should respect the animals but when we must eat,, then we must eat them. We should eat them because they are lower than us and we have dominion over them. The animals feel instrumental pain but not intrinsic pain like humans.