I continue to be unable to understand resistance to acknowledging, as a demonstrable starting point for "recognition," the observation within material existence that people have no choice but to effect choices (i.e., choose among perceived alternatives and take action to bring that choice to fruition). How is simply asserting that people should "recognize" one another because that's the way one believes people ought to act a superior argument?

That observation tells us that choosing is integral to being human. Therefore, to respect the capacity of other people to choose — beginning with choosing whether/how/to what extent to be involved whenever any choice is being effected — is to recognize them as fellow human beings.

To act otherwise is to assert by one's actions that any other being(s) that are involved in any way are not (fully) human. Any attempt to justify any such claim can only follow from some personal conviction with a starting point outside material existence. Since both the determinant (that observation) and the referents (actions undertaken in effecting any choice, which can include speech acts) of this ethic (a requirement to respect the capacity of other people to choose) are contained within material existence, any justification for violating this ethic that has a starting point that is outside material existence (such as a personal conviction that people of any 'race' or gender are somehow inherently superior — or inferior — to people of any other 'race' or gender) is legitimately de-legitimated.

That makes the applicability of this ethic to all people in all circumstances utterly (rationally) undeniable. All beliefs/personal convictions, to include all ‘values’, are non-rational. Any ethic based on any personal conviction, such as a belief in the moral equality of all people, can be rationally denied by anyone who simply does not accept that belief. While people can have different experiences of material existence, it is impossible to deny, rationally, that human beings have no choice but to effect choices — or to deny any of all that follows from that observation in terms of how people ought act regarding one another.