Cecil the Lion

I believe, with regard to the dentist and the lion:

Humaneness and kind treatment of animals arise in part from our recognition of their capacity to suffer and their capacity of conscious awareness--in other words, their human-like qualities. Killing and eating a person is more morally blameworthy than merely* killing a person, therefore, where survival does not require it, killing and eating an animal is more morally blameworthy than just killing it. 

Imagine millions of people were being killed and eaten for food in Country A. Imagine that millions of people were being killed and eaten for food in Country B. Now imagine that a man travels from Country A to Country B and murders a famous actor to acquire a trophy. Imagine further that after doing so, the populations of Country A and Country B, the overwhelming majority of whom participate in the holocaust-food genocide just described, were in an uproar over the "egregious nature of the murder" and wanted to destroy the man's business in retribution. 

That would be utterly irrational, wouldn't it?

Less self-righteousness, please. 

*The word merely is inserted as an argument building block to distinguish two levels of bad, not to diminish the wrongness of murder.