One of the great difficulties in establishing animal rights based merely on the fact that animals are living things concerns scope. If one construes the term "living things" broadly, one is bound to bestow rights on organisms that are not animals (e.g., plants). But if this term is construed narrowly, one is apt to refuse rights to organisms that at least biologically, are considered members of the animal kingdom.
If the statements above are true, which one of the following can be most reasonably inferred from them
A．Not all animals should be given nights.
B．One cannot bestow rights on animals without also bestowing rights on at least some plants.
C．The problem of delineating the boundary of the set of living things interferes with every attempt to establish animal rights.
D．Successful attempts to establish rights for all animals are likely either to establish rights for some plants or not to depend solely on the observation that animals are living things.
E．(E) The fact that animals are living things is irrelevant to the question of whether animals should or should not be accorded rights, because plants are living things too.