A contest for meat eaters

The moral majority?

April 6, 2012

In case you didn’t get enough of HuffPo’s debate over the ethics of meat-eating, the discussion continues at the New York Times.

The Ethicist points out that vegetarians have written volumes about how eating meat is morally wrong — but few meat-eaters have successfully argued how it isn’t. So the Times is asking omnivores to step up and defend their food choices in 600 words or less. The essay with the strongest argument for why eating animals is ethical — as judged by the likes of Peter Singer, Mark Bittman, and Michael Pollan, among others — gets published.

The deadline is April 8 — so put down the steak knife and start typing.

There are no comments on this item
Add a comment

Think before you type

Culinate welcomes comments that are on-topic, clean, and courteous. For the benefit of the community we reserve the right to delete comments that contain advertising, personal attacks, profanity, or which are thinly disguised attempts to promote another website.

Please enter your comment

Format: Bare URLs are automatically linked; use this style: [http://www.example.com "place text to be linked here"] for prettier links. You may specify *bold* or _italic_ text. No HTML please.

Please identify yourself

Not a member? Sign up!

Please prove that you’re not a computer

Dinner Guest

The gamification of cooking

Earning points

Most of the time with cooking and eating, the rules are clear.

Graze: Bites from the Site
First Person

The secret sharer

A father’s legacy

The Culinate Interview

Mollie Katzen

The vegetarian-cooking pioneer


Down South

Barbecue, tamales, cocktails, and more

Local Flavors

A winter romesco sauce

Good on everything

Editor’s Choice