Well it seems I've blundered right into the middle of a family feud
here ...
So I guess it's my turn to nail my colours to the mast!

1) I eat meat. Personally I would prefer to eat less meat than I do,
but both me & my partner work full-time and in our experience cooking
vegetarian food can take considerable time and effort - more so than,
say, bunging a couple of chicken kievs & a load of fries in the oven.
2) In terms of argumentative strategies I'm on the Animal Welfare side
of things (as characterised above).
3) I don't consider either side of the debate to be necessarily more
dishonest than the other, but the Animal Rights side of things reminds
me of Jainism, and I have difficulty with the kind of slippery slope
that Jainism is stuck on - brushing the ground in front of you to
remove insects is just as likely to kill those insects as protect them,
for instance. To put it another way: I think the idea that one can
somehow divorce oneself from one's environment is deeply mistaken, but
anyone who believes that kind of thing is only as dishonest as their
beliefs (if you see what I'm driving at).

Just one word on the family feud stuff - if any of this ongoing
argument's going to lead to threats of blood and death then I'm not
interested, because I think that if you believe in animal rights, then
you also believe in rights for humans because humans are animals. In
other words: I think cruelty to humans is as bad as cruelty to animals.

Other than that ...

.... En guarde!