I think I see what you mean, maybe there is a need to differentiate (individual conclusions "on their own", though there'd be arguments in favour of viewing tho

I think I see what you mean, maybe there is a need to differentiate (individual conclusions "on their own", though there'd be arguments in favour of viewing those as political as well, etc.) But perhaps not at the expense of the term "political" (but rather introduction of some other term). Because it's simply not the case that something is necessarily apolitical "until such point as political parties start taking stances on cats". Some revolutions, changes in political regime, etc. happened not via the process of already existing political establishment systems (of which parliamentary parties is a mere (and not necessary (being descriptive here, not prescriptive)) subset of) accepting / incorporating / etc. some views at all (rather the exact opposite, say). Also, "I don't like cats" is a sort of easy example to use here, but if you take e.g. "domestic violence should not happen", where do you draw the line in terms of when it becomes political (let's say you start a grassroots network where victims of domestic violence can support each other, and gradually build political capital, and so on)... That said, differentiation along your lines is maybe useful, but severely redefining the scope of the term "political" seems a weird way to go about it.