I love what I call the PETA Paradox: They believe we're morally equivalent to animals and they further believe that this means we have no right to kill and eat or otherwise use animals for out benefit.
But...the [other] anumals use each other for food, etc., so if we're morally indistinguishable, shouldn't we just strive to be the baddest animal on the block, doing what all our animal brethren do as well as we possibly can?
If they believe we should follow some type of moral framework in our interaction with animals, it means they think we're different, in fact superior.
Being civilized to a liberal means not eating meat because it is “morally wrong” but it is okay to engage in homosexuality because it can be observed in the animal kingdom.