No need to chew on anything.
I think it's a far stretch from plants exchanging information via pheromones to postulating empathy, but to each their own. If you think they hurt, you may want to not put them to agony (why would you?) Then again, if *I* thought they hurt, I'd probably try to stop you if I caught you; but I don't, so I won't.
As to the imposing views on others... The guy stealing acts according to his belief (or whatever). I act according to mine in stopping him (or not, depending on the context). I see no opposing principles here.
What i'm not going to do is chop his hand off to "save his soul", or make him swear by the Bible and the Constitution that he's not gay and hates commies or whatever... you get the picture.
Before you construct another example showing how I contradict myself, remember that this is no pissing contest about who can formulate a set of clean, self-consistent, non-contradicting set of rules to live by. To my knowledge, that's not possible (as in: impossibility is even mathematically provable). My post was just meant to give a different perspective on Buddhist philosophy. If there was a set of rules to follow blindly, and somehow have everything for everybody turn out optimal in every situation, I'm pretty sure they'd be mandatory by now everywhere in the world.