Acharya Prashant addresses the question of why one should not eat meat if their religion permits it. He begins by clarifying the significant difference between something being 'allowed' and something being 'compulsory'. Just because an act is permitted does not mean it is mandatory or that one should do it. He illustrates this with an analogy from a football match: it is technically allowed to pass the ball to the opposing team, and no penalty would be incurred, but it would be a foolish act. Similarly, religious texts may permit certain actions, but they rely on the individual's intelligence and common sense to not misuse that permission. Not using one's intelligence is a disrespect to the creator who bestowed it. He then refutes the argument that humans are naturally carnivorous. While a cow will not eat meat and a lion will, a human's behavior is not as fixed. A human is different from other animals because of consciousness. To determine a human's natural inclination, one should observe an unconditioned child. A small child, when presented with meat and fruits, will naturally gravitate towards the fruits. The speaker asserts that meat-eating in humans is a result of conditioning and training, not an innate tendency. He further argues that if one claims to be naturally carnivorous, they should hunt and eat raw meat with their bare hands and teeth, like a lion, rather than consuming processed and cooked meat. Another argument addressed is that the meat industry provides employment to many people. Acharya Prashant counters this by stating that many illegal and immoral activities, such as theft, murder, and rape, also provide a livelihood for some, but that does not make them right. One must distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate means of employment. He questions the morality of an employment that is based on cruelty and violence. Finally, he tackles the argument that eating herbivores is necessary to maintain ecological balance, citing the recent locust attacks as an example. He explains that such ecological imbalances, including the locust swarms, are often a result of anthropogenic climate change. A significant contributor to climate change is the clearing of forests for animal agriculture—to graze animals and grow their feed. He points out the irony that the very industry of animal husbandry, which is a major cause of deforestation and ecological imbalance, is then used as a justification for eating meat. He concludes that these are all foolish and dishonest arguments used to justify cruelty and the satisfaction of the tongue, urging people to use their heart and compassion.