|
Practical Issues >
Things to do >
Religion and Animals
This article seemed rather harsh and intolerant. I know, tolerance is for other religions, not Christians, and your only intolerant of intolerance, but below are some comments anyway...My comments are in { } Brackets.
********************************************************
Evolution, Catholicism, and Animal RightsMy question to Markos Alberto Moulitsas:I understood that the Pope admitted that evolution exists (that life can evolve) but I didn't think he admitted we evolved from apes; I don't think he'd let go of Genesis that easily, considering how valuable a meme mortal sin is to the Catholic Church. Markos' answer: Actually, the Catholics have been straying from Genesis for quite a while. For example, the great flood supposedly came from waters released from the stars. I don't think many people read that literally, and instead understand that this is just symbolic prose. {This is not true. There is no verse that says the waters fell from he stars. Genesis chapters 5-10 make no mention of this. Even most attackers of the Bible claim it was waters held by a solid dome over the earth when the windows were opened, a statement long disproved but still making regular rounds among skeptics, especially those in the business of attacking the Christian faith for fun and profit. Nonetheless, no verse at all says "From the stars".} -- Zarove But, to more directly answer your point, I have pulled this from the January 1, 1997 issue of Christianity Today: Papal teaching had previously accepted the idea of the descent of all life forms from common ancestry. John Paul II was largely reiterating in a much less formal manner Pius XII's understanding and reminding the scientists that if they were to be faithful Christians there were limits beyond which their science could not take them. Those limits were theological: no theory of evolution was acceptable that was purely, materialistic and that did not recognize the direct divine origin of the human soul. "Having laid down those limits, the pope encouraged the scientists to follow where their researches led them. Truth cannot contradict truth, he said. This pope's great concern - and ours - is not simply to achieve an accurate picture of human origins, but to preserve a basis for human rights. In the past, evolutionary teaching resulted in social theories that downplayed the worth of every, individual and justified the subjugation and even the elimination of the weak by the powerful, even to celebrating the qualities of a master race. If the human soul is nothing more than a highly evolved form of what animates monkeys or mules, there is no compelling reason not to treat people as laboratory animals or workhorses - or to eliminate them when they become inconvenient. Only by regarding each human being as embodying the image of God do we provide ironclad protection against oppression and the destruction of inconvenient human life. So, while the pope did not come out and specifically say that we evolved from apes, he basically said, "we cannot avoid the truth, just remember --- our souls came directly from God." { No, he said "Truth cannot conflict with truth, and at this time, this seems to be the truth, as revealed by science". What I find disturbing in this cavalier attitude is that you can flagrantly disregard someone else's beliefs, yet still claim to be tolerant. ( I read other articles before this one...) If you accept evolutionary theory, why are you mocking others who do? The answer is obvious, you want them to drop there beliefs that you disagree with so you mock and berate them. Even in this sly way. This becomes painfully evident in the last portion of this article.}-Zarove And, since there are few scientific "truths" more established than the fact that we evolved from apes, his words are basically a tacit surrender to evolutionary theory. {Not exactly surrender... remember, most early Darwinists, and many modern evolutionary Biologists, are themselves Christian and find no conflict between the Creation account and evolution, and their position isn't compromise or surrender, since one can find similar views dating back even to St. Jerome. Such insight you may ignore and claim that Christians who accept evolution are compromising there faith, which science weakens daily, but to do so is to remain completely ignorant of the depths of theological research and history that has taken place over the last two millennia. Likewise, you are ignorant of evolutionary Biology. We did NOT decent from apes. According to modern research, apes and man have a common ancestry, but man did not directly descend from the apes.}-Zarove And, incidentally, note that last paragraph which talks about "human rights." It points to the very Christian thought that continues to place animals in a lesser position than man, and thus allows all sort of cruelty. {This is a flagrant lie. Not only does the current Pope, John Paul 2, actually SUPPORT animal rights, but even declared animals have souls. The claim that the failure to mention animal rights in a single statement means animals are always thought of in Christian thought as lesser is absurd and dishonest of you. I, myself, am a Christian and a Vegetarian and an animal rights activist. The Bible itself says not to be cruel to animals. Many Christian thinkers have advocated animal rights and an end to unnecessary cruelty to animals. But that said, every time I mention rights, I sometimes only mention Human rights, and not animal rights myself. Why? Because the topic doesn't always demand specific mention of animal rights. The statement above does NOT indicate that animals are lesser beings, it only concerns itself with Human rights. The claim that it is a clear sign of Christian thoughts that animals are lesser and can be treated cruelly is an imported idea sent by the author of this article, and not native to the thoughts expressed, imposed here so the reader can accept the bias of the author without realizing it. Such is what prompted his email. It was wholly unnecessary and completely fabricated.}-Zarove A summary of the last paragraph: If we don't have souls, then we are nothing more than animals. { This is a summary which you impose, as stated above, it is not truly the meaning or intent of the paragraph you now paraphrase to re-render your prejudices. The point being made by the Pope ( The same man who declared that animals have souls in 1990) was that we should not fall back on thinking of mankind as a mere biochemical machine. This type of materialistic thinking dominated Russian atheists, who formed the basis of Soviet society. It dominated Fascist thinking, leading to the Nazi's. Simply stating a concern for Humanity and a fear that thinking of man in purely materialistic terms will lead to enslavement, laboratory experiments, and other human rights violations is not equivalent to condoning such actions preformed on animals, which he same Pope said was wrong also. Misrepresenting a man based on your own prejudices, by using a single statement and not looking into the body of work of the individual or of the religion you now try to degrade is itself not something that is seen by me as well meaning, or legitimate.}-Zarove If we are nothing more than animals, then we can be treated as "laboratory animals or workhorses" and eliminated "when [we] become inconvenient." {Yes that's Christian thought. So, it shows that Christians think animals are lesser. So we should reject this superstition and be atheists, since atheism has caused no deaths...well, if we ignore the Soviet states... Sorry lad, the point made by this was that people DID think of man in purely materialistic terms as lab animals and workhorses and he was trying to prevent this from happening again...in no way does his show Christian thought in general nor the Popes specific beliefs to be that animals are lesser beings.}-Zarove The corollary of this is: Since we *are* manifestations of the image of God, and have souls, we can subjugate animals, treating them like "laboratory animals and workhorses" and eliminating then "when they become inconvenient." {Only if you misrepresent the thoughts conveyed, which you do. And you do so for the intent of villainizing Christians in general, as revealed by your claim that Christian thought sees animals as lesser beings. Which is not true.}-Zarove Is it any wonder that Christians aren't drawn to the Animal Rights cause? {You mean like me? I am an animal rights advocate, and a Christian. Your own claims of Christian thoughts notwithstanding.}-Zarove |