I can't really disagree with this. You are right that your diet is better for you than the "moderation diet." And one could argue that an "all raw" diet is even better.
It's a question of what people are able and willing to do. Not everyone has the will or desire to perfect their diet. That doesn't mean they are less of a person, or should be treated as such. Again, I hate elitism...
I fall in the category of "moderation eaters." It is an on-going battle to push myself in a more healthy direction. For some it's easier. Take my father in law for example. Pretty much his only hobby is reading books on health and eating healthy. This means juicing a lot of vegetables, fasting regularly, taking lots of whole food supplements, drinking unpasteurized goats milk, etc, etc. When he is not working or sleeping he is probably preparing some kind of health food or reading a book about natural healing. On the other hand, I have lots of interests and hobbies. Not only do I collect 1/6 action figures, I also play disc golf and am a musician/ song writer. These things enrich my life.
Many of us knowingly sacrifice perfect meals for other things. We know that there are no guarantees in life. Although eating unhealthy food in moderation may increase our chances of heart disease, we recognize that even people like you Skiman could drop over from a heart attack tomorrow.
I don't think quality of life can be narrowed down to how perfect your health is. For most of us, we just need to try to be balanced when it comes to diet. For me, this means eating fast food rarely, eating organic when affordable and practical, and staying away from most processed food. That's my goal anyway.
Even if that's true, looking at it that way will only make you believe that you are superior to others. This will inevitably alienate your friends and family. You can believe your right without blasting others.