I agree with you, the author of the original post, and your summary, however I have one nitpick with his rape analogy.

With something like Rape, it is wrong and cannot be tolerated in even the smallest amount. Zero is the only acceptable level of rape.

Pollution is different. We all know that exterminating the majority of the human population and returning to a hunter/gatherer society is not an option. The realistic goal isn't to eliminate all forms of pollution everywhere, it is to reduce the pollution to a level that is less harmful to the planet. The problem is in identifying where and how deep to make the cuts.

Such a situation allows for a person to continue to eat meat, live in a big house and take vacations, while simultaneously calling for cuts to deforestation, legislating for EV transport and nuclear power, and do so without hypocrisy. Essentially you can have each group say "make the cuts, and make them deep, but make them over there".