Home / Weak arguments / A concession that empties the point
"I'm vegan, but I don't think everyone should be."
Said to seem flexible or avoid conflict, they turn a question about victims into a personal preference.
Why it is weak
It treats as personal taste something that has a victim. No one says "I'm against assaulting people, but I don't think everyone should be." If the harm is unjust when you cause it, it is also unjust when someone else does.
It's usually said to avoid sounding arrogant, but that's a matter of tone. You can be kind and not judge the person without giving up the conclusion.
There are legitimate distinctions the phrase erases: someone with no alternative isn't in the same situation as someone who has one, and saying something is wrong is not the same as arguing it should be banned now.
How to say it better
Anyone who can avoid harming animals has a reason to. I know change takes time, and I'm here to talk, not to judge you.