Of course plant's don't have feelings. While it's true that they might react to light or touch in different ways, they don't posses a central nervous system. This argument against veganism (if that's even what you're attempting) is idiotic on 2 levels. Firstly, pulling a carrot out of the ground and cutting the tail off a dog are going to produce two very different reactions. That is because one is a sentient being with intelligence (less than say, a pig, but quantifiable), a will to live, and an aversion to pain....and the other is a carrot.
Secondly, if you really are concerned about plants feeling pain, the majority of plants grown are used to feed the animals bred for human consumption. So if that is the concern, you're essentially doubling the amount of suffering. Or you could just use a modicum of critical thinking and reasoning and acknowledge that a carrot wont be screaming and attempting to escape if you slice into it with a knife. Same can't be said for an animal though.
It really is an important distinction to make, and maybe I don't understand your point really. If we have to eat something (and we do, that is a fact) why wouldn't we choose the path of least harm as compassionate Christians?
To answer your question, I believe it is always the better choice from a moral perspective to avoid unnecessary pain and suffering to another living being. It's unnecessary to eat meat, eating meat causes unnecessary pain and suffering to other living beings, therefore yes veganism is inherently and objectively morally superior (based on those qualifications).
It's the same as saying it is morally superior to hug a dog than to torture a dog (or pay someone else to do the torturing). Just replace dog with pig, cow, chicken, lamb to fit your own current dietary choices.