Following up my series on liberating ourselves from moralists, meddlers, and others who want to impose their subjective values on us in the name of objective truth in the realm of food, let’s continue with religion, the next on my list of a few days ago.

I expect this would-be reason to be a non-issue for obvious reasons.

Well, first, I don’t belong to any religion that has any rules requiring or forbidding eating meat, so religion doesn’t apply to me as a reason to eat meat or not.

I think most people get that their belonging to a religion doesn’t impose rules on other people. They mostly understand some semblance of tolerance for others following their religions, even if they feel compelled to impose their religion on others.

So while religions may give individuals reasons to eat or not eat meat, they don’t give people reasons to impose their preferences on others. Maybe some religions try to tell non-members what to do, but not that often.

Do I have to say more? Religion may give personal reasons to eat meat or not, but I don’t see it as an absolute justification for other people who disagree with that religion.

• ← The media keeps misinterpreting North Korea
• Why I don’t eat meat: non-issue7: anatomy →