I'm no scientist, I've just read the tl;drs. It seems clear they're more than just automatas.
Obviously people can draw the line wherever they want, but the more you nitpick about what qualities make a being okay to eat or use, the blurrier the line gets. Veganism seeks to exclude all potential suffering to err on the side of caution. I mean, honey is NOT a vital ingredient to our lives whatsoever. It's not like it takes much effort to avoid.
I mean, this has been researched. It's not just my opinion, researchers agree that bees are sentient and have feelings.
The biggest hurdle from me going vegan was I thought it would be difficult, so I did something similar. Turns out, however, that it's SUPER EASY to cut out all meat and dairy. Seriously it blew my mind. Just look up a couple recipes, make sure you read ingredient lists on products, and you're done. That's all it takes.
The key is to just commit. Jump off the high board and take the plunge. Sure the water may shock you at first but you'll quickly adapt. Quicker than you'd expect.
Bacteria and yeast aren't animals. They aren't sentient, they have no perception of the world around them, they don't have feelings. That's the difference. Nearly every animal (yes, even insects) is sentient. We may not understand exactly what it feels like to be a bee (what kinds of emotions they can experience), but it's better to err on the side of not hurting an animal than assume they are mindless little robots.
Given, this is usually not the primary focus of vegan activism. Taking some food from some bees versus raising cows in the pure hellscape that is factory farming... There's a very obvious greater evil happening. Let's not let the minutia of veganism derail from the greater picture.
Exploitation doesn't require the comprehension of the exploited. In fact, it's usually the case the exploited is unaware of it. If I tricked my brother into doing my chores for me, that's exploitation. If I take an animal's food away (thus requiring it to gather more than usual), that's exploitation.
Those animals wouldn't be born. It's supply and demand. The less demand there is for meat, the cheaper it gets, and the less incentive there will be to breed more of them. The goal is to reduce suffering as much as possible, and that can only happen if people stop paying for it.
People that want to convert you to their religion are usually concerned about YOU (saving your soul, etc.), so it's reasonable that it's YOUR choice to decline. The only concern is about your own well being.
People that want to convert you to veganism, on the other hand, are only concerned about the animals you're exploiting - it has nothing to do with you personally. Your choice to decline means you're condemning hundreds of animals to die every year for the rest of your life. This is a hard pill to swallow for animal sympathizers, so you must understand why arguments by vegans tend to be quite passionate.
But the two really aren't similar, other than the fact that they both make you uncomfortable.
You don't need to replace like for like - not every meal needs a meat replacement. My point is that to get all the nutrients you need to live and thrive, vegan diets are cheaper.
It's cheaper to eat vegan food than animals. Use the money you save on groceries to fix homelessness and sweatshops.
I think you misunderstood the sign. What does intelligence have to do with this?
ITT: A bunch of non-vegans complaining that content posted to a vegan community makes them uncomfortable.
Also ITT: A bunch of people who haven't been convinced to go vegan asserting how to convince people to go vegan. Not them, but other people of course.
Because if you're able to invalidate your opponent's candidacy for president, it makes a fascist takeover that much easier. Just change the laws so that any political opposition can't run against you, and bam your party has indefinite control.