This.
It poses the question of what is better. No life at all, or a life which ultimately leads to slaughter for meat.
Obviously treating animals badly, leading to psychological and physical pain is not good. But as long as good animal welfare standards are kept to, i fail to see the problem. As far as our science has discovered, farm animals have no concept of what they are alive for and what their purpose is (ie that they are bred for meat), and when i'm on a walk through the countryside, most of the cows, sheep and pigs i see look pretty damn content/calm.
So the question has to be asked...won't ending meat farming mean the end of millions of potential animal lifes? Death is a consequence of life, so saying that eating meat causes deaths is a rather strange argument. The whole natural food chain has shown that the destiny of most animals is that they end up as food for a different one.
You can’t give an animal a nice life and then murder it. It’s a logical fallacy.
Ending meat farming will mean those millions of animals won’t exist so there’s nothing to kill. That’s better.