I find the ethical argument interesting. At what point do animals become "pets" or "cuddly"? e.g. we all kill bacteria on a daily basis. Some of us will kill ants and mosquitoes, but will not eat meat because it's killing animals. I suppose killing mozzies and fleas is considered self-defense?
Honestly, I am not sure what the problem is.
We can't live without killing, breatharians and fruitarians not withstanding. We almost all agree that killing plants to eat is fine, and killing humans to eat is not fine. After that, it's a matter of where you chose to draw the line. It seems close something is to you genetically/evolutionarily/environmentally is as good a criteria as any. I personally would not eat an hominid or indeed any other primate, both for moral and more selfishly disease reasons. I also do not eat any cetaceans. I'm ashamed to admit I once ate something
endangered, to avoid a socially awkward situation, but that is something I will try never to do again.
So people draw the line at not eating their fellow mammals, or fellow warm blooded creatures or fellow land animals or fellow animals. We all draw a line somewhere.
It's interesting that people here aren't defending their own lines, but criticising other people lines.