Shortages of human organs for transplants is a major problem in transplantology, as each year thousands of people die who would have lived had they received a transplant. So, new and alternative sources of organs must be found. Scientists are currently researching xenotransplantation, the moving of organs from one species to another. The most promising donors for such transplants are pigs and baboons, but xenogeneic transplantation from these animals to humans involves high immune incompatibility and a violent rejection process. Thus, scientists are genetically modifying the genome of pigs and baboons with human transgenic DNA to inhibit xenograft rejection in humans. Although this research may save lives one day, many question the moral permissibility of humans breeding, genetically modifying, and harvesting the organs of animals that are close to us on the phylogenetic scale. This apprehension stems from pigs’ and baboons’ capacity to experience pain and higher order emotions. People are concerned that xenotransplantation preparation of animals implies that these animals are not part of the moral community. I do not deny that animals are part of the moral community. I agree with Jeremy Bentham’s link of suffering with moral status. Scientific studies support that “higher” animals like pigs and baboons can consciously experience pain, so I believe they have moral status. However, not all beings who have moral standing have the same moral standing. I will apply R.G. Frey’s unequal value thesis to xenotransplantation to emphasize that human life is more valuable than animal life, as our capacity for enrichment vastly exceeds that of nonhuman animals. Thus, I argue that xenotransplantation is morally acceptable, as it will save the lives of greater value while sacrificing the lives of lesser value.