Sean expressed himself in a way that may be counterproductive, since aggravating others seldom convinces them -- but he's right. Ethical matters are not merely matters of taste (figuratively or literally). Just substitute "slaveholder" for "omnivore" and "slave" for "animal" and see whether claims to the effect that "it's my choice" make much sense. Even Sartre said that when we choose we don't choose only for ourselves but for everyone, and so we bear a heavy moral responsibility in all our choices.

The whole meat-eater position is wonderfully summed up in Charles Eisenstein's little "Thanks to all the beings who created this food. I dedicate this meal to a child who is truly hungry." Is the tortured animal any less dead? Is the hungry child any less hungry? But, hey, the important thing is to do what feels good, right?