I've got to defend Doddy's position here. He's not arguing for racism, or arguing against species-ism. He's just pointing out something that you and anglagard should be well aware of:
A scientific theory doesn't give us a guide to ethics.
It tells us what is the case, not what we ought to do. If the theory of evolution told us that there were quite distinct differences between the human races (rather than the opposite), would that justify us in being racist? I hope not. I hope that we would make our ethical judgement based on other factors, and still argue against racism. So how can it provide a guide in the opposite direction?
We are constantly telling creationists here that the ToE doesn't say anything about the existence of God or how we should behave (i.e. accepting the ToE doesn't mean you have to be an atheist or a nihilist), so how can it suddenly have ethical meaning when we want to defend a favourite ethical belief?
'I can't even fit all my wife's clothes into a suitcase for travelling. So you want me to believe we're going to put all of the planets and stars and everything into a sandwich bag?' - q3psycho on the Big Bang