So I actually admit in the later reply down below that I don't really have a line. In fact, what I prefer is closer to what you suggest here: a level of respect

So I actually admit in the later reply down below that I don't really have a line. In fact, what I prefer is closer to what you suggest here: a level of respect for life that isn't bunched into two classes but should be on a spectrum dependent on their level of sentience. The reason I said the actual word "line" wasn't too literal, I meant it more in a colloquial sense; I think a more helpful wording would be "you can't include all animals under your definition of 'sentience', some will fall short and essentially make life very unpleasant for you and those humans you love." The commenter I was replying too shared links that suggest that nearly all mammals should have their life respected and their interests "cannot be considered to have less weight than humans' interests[0]", which is an extreme position most people won't take. [0] http://www.animal-ethics.org/sentience-section/relevance-of-sentience/ http://www.animal-ethics.org/sentience-section/relevance-of-...