are vegetarians more ethical by not eating meat?

[The Grand Nudger]

If we talk about moral is then important to understand what is moral and what is immoral.
According to my values moral is anything that help us to get closer to our goal of life (human emancipation) while immoral is what get us far from our goal of life.

Everyone makes their own decisions about this based upon their own metrics. No argument from me on this count.

In other words killing and eating animals is immoral as the suffering that we are causing to animals will produce a bad karma for us (actions and reactions).

On the scale of decent justification for a statement, I'd say this falls pretty low - but that's just me. If your reason for calling this immoral is due to suffering - then any production and harvest procedure that doesn't involve suffering is a-ok. IOW, eating meat isn't immoral, but torturing animals, essentially, is. Further, if this justification depends upon some elusive "karma" it's doa unless you can produce some of that karma, eh?

In the scale of right and wrong we can well be excused in taking other lives if we have no choices as vegetarian food is not available but if we have a choice then is wrong.

You'll be taking lives with your bean salad as well. Alot of them. The hill of morality loses a few feet of altitude.

People may argue that also to cut a plant is causing suffering.
That is also quite true but as i said in previous post............less consciousness and less pain and beside if we eat nothing we die and that is not the objective of life so by being moral i do what cause less problem for everybody and everything else.

I wouldn't personally argue that - but less suffering as opposed to what, and again, removing suffering from the equation leaves us where? Picture this, livestock chillin in a field (or swimming in a tank) eating an appropriate diet. Safe from predators, protected from disease...and then, one day - nothing. Captive bolt. What then?