There is no other moral stance where someone could reasonably say this. Veganism is a moral stance the same way as "racism is bad" and "abusing my spouse is bad" is a moral stance. No one would ever say "I'm trying to limit kicking dogs to just Tuesday-Sunday".
> vegan straight edge kids on Instagram who sneak a chicken nugget when no one's looking.
You're projecting. Veganism is _not_ a diet.
I don't have to view eating meat or driving my car an inherently immoral in order to recognize the objective negative ecological impact that those actions have, and to therefore want to engage in some form of harm reduction from time to time.
I think there is a place for that, for example art or activism, but when speaking directly to another human, absolutes seem to place a lot of people on their back foot in defense of their current established decisions.
Since there actually exists real-life animal abuse in the case of paying for meat or any animal product ( including dairy ).
Personally, I am vegetarian due to ethical concerns, not dietary or nutritional ones. In my decade+ of being vegetarian, I have discerned the pattern that moral proselytizing is generally offensive to people. I think most intelligent non-vegetarians are more amenable to talking about clearly objective impacts (number of dead animals, environmental impact, nutrition, etc).
I prefer to be able to have a rational conversation when I talk about the topic with someone. Righteous indignation is more usually a thought extinguishing reaction to all involved. And then no one comes away with anything at all.
We also routinely deal with non-absolutes on these types of subjects. It's extremely common for people to disagree with the appropriate level of anti-racism, or the appropriate level of respect with which to treat one's spouse.
> You're projecting. Veganism is _not_ a diet.
It's more than a diet, for sure. But I do know many, many people who aspire to veganism and who at times make concessions. I don't think less of them for doing so.
I agree that this holds from an ethical standpoint, but from an environmental one reduction is perfectly reasonable and needs to be part of the conversation.