Morality of Omnivorism

In researching our assignment in defense of meat-eating I landed on the Beef Quality Association site. I found their information educational, disgusting, and in light of the recent expose on forcibly torturing sick cattle into meat grinders, quite unbelievable.

The American Beef Associations sites tell us:

Consumers can feel good about loving beef because the protein in beef is a powerful nutrient that strengthens and sustains their bodies.

The BQA repeatedly refer to beef from carcasses that consistently satisfies customer expectations for eating characteristics, with strict government inspection systems that ensure safe, wholesome, correctly labeled and packaged beef products. However, beef carcass quality grading is voluntary. Therefore, not all carcasses are quality graded.

I was intrigued by their concept of expectations for eating characteristics. It sounds like their target audience eats primarily for pleasure, not health and sustenance. I wonder to what degree sensory or emotional pleasure factor into one's choice to eat meat or eat not-meat.

One can get much more protein from smaller amounts of meat than similar amounts of not-meat. Meat products from ungraded carcasses are relatively cheap. How much of a factor is poverty in one's choice/non-choice to eat meat or eat not-meat?

I have some expectations for eating characteristics of my own. I often ignore my hunger rather than eat food that I do not like or postpone eating until I can get the "right" stuff. My mind, my spiritual self, and my body prefer to eat only organic unprocessed, not-meat food. My emotional self enjoys good chocolate in various forms. I first became a vegetarian in 1978 for health reasons. While pregnant or nursing, I ate fish and chicken. Then I returned to vegetarianism. During times of significant ill health, if my body craves meat, I fulfill the craving, but always return to vegetarianism.

What percentage of a person's decision to eat meat is morality-based? For how many people is it an economically-based choice or non-choice? For how many is it simply the continuation of one's cultural or religious norm - where consideration of omnivorism or vegetarianism is inconceivable; or would result in ejection from, or rejection by one's family and peers? For how many is it a health-based rather than moral choice. How many people choose to be omnivores because they find it more sensory pleasurable or emotionally satisfying than vegetarianism?

The definition of morality is one's beliefs regarding appropriate behavior - an individual's comprehension of morality and the capacity to put it into practice. Should we view omnivorism and vegetarianism as a choice/non-choice arising from individual or social morality? Or, is one's choice of omnivorism or vegetarianism the expression of one's personal ethics or social ethics? Is it a moral issue for some, but an ethical issue for others?