Eesh, things have gone harsh the last handful of posts.
Yeah, own $0.02 is that I don't think humans are morally superior, at all. We're the world's top superpredators, and because of that have achieved dominance, but there's no prescriptive nature to that -- no "should" in relation to our ability to (functionally) value ourselves more than other species. Frankly, they can't stop us, and that's the absolute core of the difference between humanity and the rest of the animals -- most attempts I've seen to find justification otherwise is just an attempt to rationalize what amounts to atrocity. Most of our population isn't noticeably different from "lesser" species, behaviorally; there's not really a hard factual line to draw between homo sapiens and the rest of the fleshy things roaming around the planet.
We've got somewhat more impressive communication abilities, our tool-use has managed an interesting sort of generational development that's done some really neat things, and we've got some neat physical tricks that let us leverage that to the point we took over, but that's not really a moral or objective superiority, imo. More of a "victor writing history" sort of thing.
Which... I don't try to justify it. It's a horrible thing, but, y'know, we're the group-enabled superpredator, and the non-human world is our victim. Until a majority of our species actually groks that what we're doing is morally bankrupt and basically nothing but dominance play (no better than a dog, y'ken?) or a better predator comes along, nothing is going to stop us. What we do to other species is far from the greatest moral atrocity we commit with regularity, heh.