RE: Do non-humans possess the same inherent rights that humans do?
The rights of a gazelle who is being mauled and eaten by a tiger, are in the same location and or state that the rights of a rape victim are in, and that is violation.
A rape victim still has rights while they're being raped, the rapist is just violating them. A gazele still has rifhts when It id getting attacked and or eaten, the aggressor is just violating them. Rights are not guarantees.
Does an apple tree die when you eat its fruit? How about blueberry bushes?
If you do not pick fruits or vegetables, what happens? They get eaten, or they rot.
A plant can not express non-consent in any ways that a human can naturally identify. When you aggress against an animal, you get a reaction from the animal that innately informs you of their emotional state; same can't be said for plants.
Plants do not mourn and have never been proven to be sentient and or capable of processing emotion.
so, you're saying that a lion, i believe i said, that is eating a gazelle or some other animal, the only thing it is evolve to eat, is violating the rights of that animal.
is that correct? i don't want to put words in your keyboard.