Yes, in a society with both human and non-human agents, if the humans contribute nothing at all to the non-humans, and only consume resources that might have been otherwise used, then the non-humans will judge the humans to be worthless. Worse than worthless. A drain to be eliminated.

But there is nothing special about my version of ethics in this regard. It is a problem that must be faced in any system of ethics. It is the FAI problem. Eliezer's solution is apparently to tell the non-human agents as they are created "Humans are to be valued. And don't you forget it when you self-modify." I think that a better approach is to make sure that the humans actually contribute something tangible to the well-being of the non-humans.

Perhaps neither approach is totally safe in the long run.