I perceive you argument to be incomplete. It takes for granted that simply because something is biological reality it is not worth going against. Your argument

I perceive you argument to be incomplete. It takes for granted that simply because something is biological reality it is not worth going against. Your argument as seen by me, ends on a cliff-hanger: Because great apes are omnivores they eat meat which is a biological reality. It is biological reality for humans to eat meat so it is okay to eat meat... Question: Why does biological reality make things ok in a way that does not boil down to an appeal to nature?