Passage Summary: People who hate animal cruelty often have pets that eat meat, which means those people are supporting the very cruelty they claim to oppose.

Conclusion: Many people who are strongly opposed to animal cruelty are actually contributing to it.

Reasoning: Many animal lovers keep pets like cats and dogs, and these pets are typically fed meat.

Analysis: The argument makes a massive leap from 'feeding meat to a pet' to 'contributing to animal cruelty.' For this to be true, the argument must assume that the production of that pet food involves cruelty. If the meat was sourced in a way that didn't involve cruelty (a tall order, perhaps, but logically possible), the conclusion would fall apart. To find the necessary assumption, look for a statement that links the pet food industry or meat production to the specific cruelty these people oppose.