If farming was done humanely. Would you rather live a predator free, well fed life, one day to be quickly led to slaughter and quickly killed. Or always be looking for food, living life on the run from predators, one day to be slowly eaten alive ass hole first? Which creates more suffering?
The question is about whether meat-eating is a good policy; not whether you "are hungry", ie. have the desire to eat at this moment.
Simply saying you're hungry. Arguman arguments (and arguments in general) should stay on-topic. However, I won't report red herrings, unless it gets too out of hand, so feel free to talk about whatever.
Animal populations need to be managed otherwise they destabilize the environment. If we didn't eat meat we'd need to introduce more predators. Animals still die, often a lot worse in the wild than in slaughter houses. Lots of meat would be wasted that could be nourishing humans.