[MathCodeLove]

I disagree and your comparisons aren't accurate. A more accurate comparison would he to say its like "I'm going to ride my bike to work once a week" or "I'll pick up trash at the local park once a week".

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.

[nefitty]

Yes, excellently stated. That's precisely my original point. I intended to preemptively disarm the conversational decay that absolutes cause.

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.

[Azek]

At risk of getting tedious here, the even-more accurate comparison would be "I'm gonna limit paying someone else to kick a dog from Tuesday to Sunday".

Since there actually exists real-life animal abuse in the case of paying for meat or any animal product ( including dairy ).

[MathCodeLove]

I would think that's still not as accurate as the above examples. That implies a form of intended malice and wish to do harm at no personal gain. If the factory in which my car is manufactured happens to employ children that doesn't mean I'm paying for child labor - I'm paying for a car regardless of how it's produced. The attempt to shift the blame to the consumer here fallacious.