Peter Singer in an opinion piece for the #NYTimes:
“Boycotting this monstrous abuse of billions of #animals each year is a powerful reason for not eating meat, but the outsize contribution of meat and dairy products to #climatechange is for me now an equally urgent part of shifting to a plant-based diet.”
“[…] in the absence of meat and dairy taxes, the power lies with those who consume animal products, and with the institutions that provide food for many of us.” 
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/22/opinion/earth-day-climate-change-meat-vegan.html
@j9t Maybe it’s better to not promote people with eugenicist views?
@yatil, sorry, didn’t run a background check on Peter Singer. Don’t mean to endorse everything he says or does. Would need to review what’s going on here and how it’s to be weighed.
I think it's better to promote good ideas, regardless of the people who happen to agree.
In this case: what #PeterSinger is advocating on that piece couldn't be clearer or more constructive: we should reduce our consumption of animal products for ethical and for environmental reasons.
Even if his position on the welfare of seriously handicapped babies were “eugenics” (and I think it's not, because his rationale is not the “improvement” of future generations but reducing suffering for both the baby and his/her carers, and because most newborns with severe disabilities would have a very narrow chance of having descendants anyway), does that somehow invalidate the amazing work he has done for decades in favour of the global poor, philanthropy, animal welfare, etc?
