What about the idea of animal rights?

[LutherMan]

I actively seek out and kill any/and all raccoons I can.  They are nasty creatures ridden with disease.  I have good counsel on doing so, a friend who is one of the wealthiest and most liberal women on the planet encourages me to do so.  She also advocates killing cottontails for the purpose of eradicating them but I am told to let the possums be...

[Charles_Austin]

Craig Johansen writes:
I actively seek out and kill any/and all raccoons I can.  They are nasty creatures ridden with disease.
I comment:
I am shocked! Shocked at the blatant and overt evidence of speciesism aimed at raccoons! Have you not heard that all animals are created equal?

Craig Johansen writes:
I have good counsel on doing so, a friend who is one of the wealthiest and most liberal women on the planet encourages me to do so.  She also advocates killing cottontails for the purpose of eradicating them but I am told to let the possums be...
I comment:
That friend is no "liberal," nosiree! Now you say she advocates genocide for lagomorphs! And what kickback is she getting from the possum lobby?
Shocking! Shocking!

[Dan Fienen]

I was amused some years back at the Disney film The Lion King.  They went to great lengths to explain how a carnivorous predator could be a good guy.

Whether you go with God or evolution made us this way, we are built to be omnivores.   Our dentition, digestion and nutritional needs all suggest that we are built to have some meat in our diet.  Eliminating meat necessitates extensive dietary workarounds to supply the nutrients that otherwise would be provided by meat.

Dan

[LutherMan]

I just know that I really enjoyed my homemade farm-raised gourmet braunschweiger sammy today on rye with mustard, mayo and tomato, red onion and lettuce.  The chicken breast for dinner was yummy as well...
I met the pig who provided the meat for my lunch.  An Iowegian ELCA cousin raised it...

[Team Hesse]

I think the idea of "rights" in any sense is entirely bogus.

M. Staneck

I agree with you, Matt, and have argued such as far back as my senior thesis in Christ College at Valpo (1994).  In it, I disputed the theory of rights as divisive of what it means to be human which is to be in relation to each other.  At the same time, I acknowledged the political utility of the notion of rights as being the best defense against an absolutist state and as being the best notion to protect human flourishing in the political sphere currently on offer.

I would probably go a little further down this track with the notion that the only "right" humanity has earned is the right to die--"the wages of sin is death"-- the rest is a figment of our fallen imagination.


Lou

[Norman Teigen]

Naming the Animals

Having commanded Adam to bestow
Names upon all the creatures, God withdrew
To empyrean palaces of blue
That warm and windless morning long ago,
And seemed to take no notice of the vexed
Look on the young man's face as he took thought
Of all the miracles the Lord had wrought,
Now to be labelled, dubbed, yclept, indexed.

Before an addled mind and puddled brow,
The feathered nation and the finny prey
Passed by; there went  biped and quadruped
Adam looked forth with bottomless dismay
Into the tragic eyes of his first cow,
And shyly ventured, 'Thou shalt be called  "Fred." '

Anthony Hecht

source: The Oxford Companion To the Year

[Matt Hummel]

I would probably go a little further down this track with the notion that the only "right" humanity has earned is the right to die--"the wages of sin is death"-- the rest is a figment of our fallen imagination.


Lou

Lou-  If you would, expound a little more on this please.  One of the pleasures for me of coming into the Catholic Church has been the Tardis-like discovery of Catholic Social Teaching.  I know we are going to disagree, and I am not going to presume to correct you, but I am interested in the theological anthropology that leads you to state what you did.

[Kurt Strause]

Charles makes the distinction between sentient and non-sentient life and, though he eats meat, seems to imply that eating animals is a more serious endeavor. Maybe that's so and there may be something of a hierarchy of care when it comes to our food, but I would argue the real distinction is between life and non-life. Eating anything, animal or vegetable, includes of necessity the sacrifice of life. Something must die in order that we might be fed. This is my argument with vegetarians and vegans. They contend there is a moral difference between the sacrifice of animal life and plant life. Since all life comes from God there is really no moral difference between the two when it comes to its sacrifice for our benefit.

Kurt Strause 

[Team Hesse]

I would probably go a little further down this track with the notion that the only "right" humanity has earned is the right to die--"the wages of sin is death"-- the rest is a figment of our fallen imagination.


Lou

Lou-  If you would, expound a little more on this please.  One of the pleasures for me of coming into the Catholic Church has been the Tardis-like discovery of Catholic Social Teaching.  I know we are going to disagree, and I am not going to presume to correct you, but I am interested in the theological anthropology that leads you to state what you did.

Matt-- thanks for the follow-up but I am not in a position today for a solid discussion for various reasons. Briefly-- my anthropology generally begins with the fall into sin. The law, which needed to be stated because of the fall, is the source of all of the anthropology of rights which has come about since. IF there had been no fall, there would be no need for spoken law and no discussion of rights. The only way to reach the state of freedom from law and the focus on rights is "to take up our cross and follow Him." The things we are about in the time before His second coming when He will make all things new are going to perish--only His Word will be part and parcel of the new creation. Rights talk, while important in the here and now, is, in the grand scheme of things, transient.


Lou

[Bergs]

In the sermon this morning Pastor John pointed out that the first killing in Scripture is done by God.  In Genesis 3:21 we find that God is first to kill one of the animals to provide clothes for Adam and Eve.  Up until that time Scripture records no death in the Garden of Eden.

Brian J. Bergs
Minneapolis, MN

[Coach-Rev]

Honestly, I find it more disturbing that we are more bent on protecting the bald eagle, for example, than we are an unborn human life.  Mind you, I have no problem with species protection, especially when they are endangered because of our own actions.

Would that not also fit an unborn human?  Seems like in this day and age, when we are so bent on protecting other "lesser" species, we ought to afford the same protections for our own, since they too are endangered because of our own actions.

[George Erdner]

Honestly, I find it more disturbing that we are more bent on protecting the bald eagle, for example, than we are an unborn human life.  Mind you, I have no problem with species protection, especially when they are endangered because of our own actions.

Would that not also fit an unborn human?  Seems like in this day and age, when we are so bent on protecting other "lesser" species, we ought to afford the same protections for our own, since they too are endangered because of our own actions.

I'm concerned about vague mentions of "we" that don't specify who the "we" is, and with comparison of two different actions as if they were an either/or choice. Personally, I've never lifted a finger to help or hurt a bald eagle. I also don't see where there is any reason why people cannot easily support protecting, or not protecting, unborn children and bald eagles.


Who is this "we" you're talking about who are bent on protecting "lesser" species but not unborn humans?

[Coach-Rev]

would it be better if I said "liberals?"  I'm using "we" collectively as a society, which is sadly being controlled at present by a liberal mindset.

Our laws protect bald eagles, but do nothing to protect an unborn child.

[George Erdner]

would it be better if I said "liberals?"  I'm using "we" collectively as a society, which is sadly being controlled at present by a liberal mindset.

Our laws protect bald eagles, but do nothing to protect an unborn child.

I don't know that "better" or "worse" are even applicable. However, it might make the "we" more understandable. Frankly, our society is so fragmented I don't see how any attempt to make a universal statement about it could possibly be accurate.

[Norman Teigen]

Would anyone like to discuss the meaning of 'dominion' for the discussion.  God gave Adam dominion over things.  How far does this dominion concept travel?   There is a group of theologians who are known as 'Dominionists' who are small in number but not without some influence.   Inquiring minds are waiting to hear answers.

My opinion is that animals should not be subjected to cruelty but that there are no inherent rights for animals.   I respect the fact that farmers do not subject their animals to cruelty while they are being raised, it is not economically sensible to do so.   Persons who torture animals are seen to have deeper personality disorders.