are vegetarians more ethical by not eating meat?

[littleendian]

Doesn't it really come down to one thing? That being whether or not we consider it moral (or right, or just, or whichever word fits) to kill an animal for food.

The term "food" is ambiguous here. There is "food" for someone who is starving and there is "food" for a well-fed person sitting in a BBQ joint stuffing his face with beef because he enjoys the taste. You may kill someone who is about to kill you, but you may not kill someone for the joy of killing.

Or perhaps the question is whether we place non-human animals on the same "moral plane" as humans.

That woud be, of course, irrational, because animals can have no or only very limited understanding of moral concepts. However, we can apply human morals to human actions, and as so far as these actions affect the life and well-being of another non-human animal I would argue that, yes, we certainly do have a moral responsibility towards these creatures and in that sense yes, we must extend our "moral plane" to include them.

Because the line drawn between man and beast is just Christian dogma. I invite anyone to provide a more logical line than the one that includes all those who can suffer and who have a desire to live.