Are the moral arguments for vegetarianism rational?

Here's the original version of the question:

Is vegetarianism compatible with Objectivism?

That is, can it be morally justified according to Objectivist principles, such as through an individual holding the lives of animals to be a higher value than the advantages (such as taste or nutrition) gained by eating meat?

I read a book by Dr. Joel Fuhrman entitled "Eat to Live." He advocated a vegan diet or at least one that is 90% plant based. It seems like the Paleo-diet is all the rage with Objectivists these days, but I like this diet. I eat mostly vegetables, lettuce, some whole grains like oatmeal and a lot of nuts, beans, and lentils. I eat very little processed food or flour. I eat meat maybe once a week when I go to my Mom's for dinner. Once in a great while I'll even have cheese enchiladas, but cheese is probably the worst thing you can eat. I have now dated a couple vegetarians and a vegan and they drive me crazy. One time someone offered me to try a French fry and the vegan said "Don't eat that--they cook it in duck fat!" I didn't even want it, but I ate it. :) They choose the diet for animal rights and some of them eat a lot of cheese, ice cream or even beans with lard in them because they don't do the research. I think the main reason why I even eat the meat that I do is because I don't want to become one of those people. I call them vegetarians who hardly eat vegetables. They are the worst kind because they are actually sacrificing themselves for animals. I mean I don't kick dogs or anything, but if it's the zombie apocolypse and I'm stuck in a basement with the choice of eating Lassie or starving to death....I'm not going to turn. ;)