I was surprised to see that the author of the piece in question was a junior because his letter exactly fits the definition of "sophomoric" ("Vegan lifestyle goes against nature's plan," March 30). A few quick points -- while it may not be possible to prove that animals have souls, it cannot be denied that they suffer horribly when raised and slaughtered as they are today.

It would not take more farmland, as the author asserts, if everyone became vegetarian but far less, as eating plants directly is far more efficient than feeding grain to livestock and then eating the animals.

By the way, a recent UN report concludes that livestock are the single biggest contributor to global warming and going vegetarian makes more of a contribution to reducing greenhouse grasses than buying a hybrid car. Regarding "nature's plan," do we really want to follow the law of the jungle where everything big eats everything smaller? Or as human beings can we establish a system of ethics and morals which makes humans more than just another animal.

Albert Einstein and Leonardo da Vinci both espoused lives free of killing other sentient beings in order to eat them. But obviously the author is the intellectual superior of both.

This is a serious subject worthy of serious debate rather than the pathetic attempts to ridicule it by someone who knows nothing about the topic he is writing on.