I'm saying that everybody should bear in mind that eating meat, vegetarianism and veganism are all common dietary choices, so unless they are eating with people they regularly eat with, this should be the first thing that pops into their minds when planning a meal with others. Also things like allergies: this is just natural when you're catering/planning meals including people who do/may have specific requirements, so you DO need to consider that.
If you choose to ignore it, you are a bad host and friend - it makes as much 'sense' as an all-male group of architects omitting any provision for ladies' toilets and claiming 'it just didn't occur to them that women might also need to go, and couldn't use urinals'.
I've already 'engaged with the premise' and answered your hypothetical question about dog meat. You don't actually know me or my morals; but as I said before, if I happily eat (non-human!) meat, I wouldn't have a moral objection to somebody else eating a different kind of meat. It's not the 'gotcha' that you seem to think it is.
Nobody - certainly not I - has suggested asking vegans to cook meat. I'm presuming that, if the chefs at the Indian takeaway objected to cooking meat, they wouldn't offer it or get a job there.
Yet again, I have never suggested that a vegan/vegetarian should have to cook, touch or allow meat into their home, if they have a moral objection to it. The question arose from this OP because the friend chose not to mention a very important factor when agreeing what and where she and OP would meet and eat.
It's kind of the equivalent of a MN thread titled 'My husband beats me every single night - should I leave him' and then coming back four hours later to hundreds of posters' sound advice and adding "oh, by the way, I meant at Boggle". Whether online or irl, drip-feeding is selfish, deliberately misleading and wholly unnecessary.