On chicken soup: I'm sorry if you found the example offensive; I'm not out to offend. I didn't, and don't, claim that chicken soup is important for all Jews, just as I didn't, and don't, claim that meat is important for all foodies. I used the particular example of chicken soup (rather than any other food potentially important to any other religious group) because I was thinking about this paper -- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-019-09978-6 -- in which a Jewish vegan philosopher reflects on the tensions that she herself experiences around chicken soup. Perhaps I should have included a link to the paper in the article.

On rights: No, I didn't provide a list of rights in this article. In my view, as I said, precisely which rights animals have will come down to their particular interests. But I'm not sure I fully understand your point about animals being created for human purposes. It's true that many domestic animals have been brought into existence solely because people want to use them for something. But that doesn't seem to be a very good argument for ignoring their interests. Equally (I borrow this argument from Robert Nozick) we wouldn't be impressed with someone who claimed that a child didn't have rights because this child had been brought into existence for some sinister purpose.