Very well laid out. We have to keep in mind our tendency to assign the notion of consciousness to things that don't necessarily "possess" consciousness, so the issue will be forced upon us as a society. Problem is, we have to over-simplify our own consciousness in order to say that a machine is conscious. You can take apart an AI's "brain": motherboard, RAM, memory storage, etc, but you can't actually do the same with Humans. It's known as "the hard problem." We don't actually KNOW how our minds work, although we can manipulate the mind technologically or via literally poking the brain. You'll have to ignore this amazing truth and thus truncate scientific advancement in order to declare AI as "conscious."
Another argument is the Existential argument. An AI is not a Being. You referred to aging and death - these are fundamental aspects of Being. A Human Being is a process, unfolding on multiple dimensions, experiencing itself as one single thing and experiencing essentially the same process as its fellow Beings. The reason I don't kill, rape, torture, or steal from my fellow Human Beings is because I respect their singularity moving through that process and would like them to respect my singularity and that of the people around me. In the same way, I don't murder "animals" for any other reason than to eat them. When I finally own some land I will keep chickens, pigs, and maybe cows. I will keep them in an environment they need, refrain from interfering with them, and eventually kill them to eat them before they grow old and begin to suffer. I do this because I respect that Being. The Being of Human, the Being of Chicken, the Being of Cow. These are processes with "something" that is aware of that process.
What are machines? What are they Being? There's no discernible process there. So why should I respect it enough to not use it to my selfish advantage? You'd be hard pressed to get me to respect that more than, say, a tree.