The flaw in your reasoning is assuming ANYONE or THING is entitled to rights. They are not. Rights are taken and held by force or the ability to apply force. There is no universal morality. So again your lifestyle is based on a flawed emotional rationalization.
I agree that we've essentially pulled the concept of "rights" out of nowhere. We created them because we want them and because they help keep society stable.
That being said, most people will agree to this social contract of human rights.
There does not need to be a universal or objective morality for the vegan argument to work.
You are applying human concepts that keep the human population safe and alive as a whole and applying it to creatures who cannot reason. You are using your feelings instead of logic.
This next part is where we disagree. So you've named the trait as the ability to reason. I say "If a retard can't reason, is it okay to murder the retard?" I say no, you say yes. You have a consistent position, but it's not one many agree with. If I wanted to push you, I could say "Is it okay to infinitely holocaust retards?" You'd have to say yes to be consistent.
(post is archived)