Yes, the Universal Law applies to any kind of sentient being. See for instance my essay "Identity, Immunity, Law and Aggression on the Rapacious Hardscrapple Frontier" http://fare.tunes.org/liberty/hardscrapple.html

And no, I never argued that "if it appeals to intelligent people, it's wrong". Your implied argument is a straw man. If you read carefully, I give a very specific criterion on how one may lift the burden of the proof against tradition.

Who of the proponents of a theory and its opponents are bullet-swallowers? Each thinks it's the other. Using that as an argument is begging the question.