Are There Any Rights That Animals Should Have

It'south non uncommon to see animals exalted and valued far above humans. Creature rights groups, such as PETA (People for the Ethical Handling of Animals), vehemently fight confronting the use of animals for anything, saying things such equally, "Animals are non ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in whatever other way"1 and "When it comes to pain, love, joy, loneliness, and fearfulness, a rat is a hog is a domestic dog is a boy. Each ane values his or her life and fights the knife."2 What should a Christian'southward response be to these arguments?

If Humans Are Merely Animals Then . . .

Well, it's important to offset notation the inconsistency of most animal rights groups. These groups claim to be against fauna abuse, merely are these aforementioned people against the corruption of millions of children who are brutally murdered in their mother's wombs through abortion?

It'south rather ironic that in PETA'due south evolutionary worldview humans are merely animals, yet PETA does not petition confronting the "animal cruelty" of killing unborn children. And what about a Save the Tapeworms Lodge or People for the Preservation of Fruit Flies?

If all life evolved, shouldn't these groups exist against killing these creatures too? Yet almost animal rights groups are not trying to preserve pests like these. This highlights their inconsistency. And if they are evolutionists, and then all life, animals and plants, are related in the one big supposed evolutionary tree of life. And so what about rights for plants besides?

Now some animal rights people claim they are Christians. If and so, then they need to understand that God gave human dominion over creation (Genesis 1:26), including over the animals. This dominion does not hateful we can deliberately corruption, fail, or impairment creation, but rather, we're to use what God has made for our skillful and His celebrity. In Genesis 1:29 and 30, God told man to eat plants/fruits. But in Genesis 9:3 later on the Overflowing, God said we could eat all things (plants and animals).

Animal rights groups really want animals to have dominion over human being. Notwithstanding, ironically, well-nigh would claim that man is just an animal. And so if they want equal rights for animals, what rights should humans have if they believe man is just an evolved animate being?

For example if animals kill other animals, do animal rights groups retrieve humans (if we're just animals) should accept equal rights to impale too? Why should we be held to some higher standard or different moral code from other animals?

If animals steal from other animals, do animal rights groups think humans (if nosotros're only evolved animals) should have equal rights to steal? What almost incest, cannibalism, or baby abandonment? Why are these things wrong for humans but not wrong for "other" animals? If brute rights activists were consequent, they should argue that it is okay to steal from animals, kill them, and eat them—since this is what we regularly observe in sin-cursed animals anyway.

Where Practise Rights Come From?

In an evolutionary worldview, what makes animal rights activists remember that rights be in the first place? Rights are an abstract concept that comes from a biblical worldview, which is denied by the evolutionary position. The evolutionary position, which comes out of naturalism and materialism, cannot business relationship for the concept of rights, considering they are not material. In other words, the evolutionary materialist must borrow the concept of rights from Christians to fence against the Christian position of human being superior and in dominion over animals.

If animals are no different from humans, and so why aren't roundworms making the argument for animal rights, instead of people? We don't find the arrangement of roundworms chosen the Roundworms for the Upstanding Treatment of Animals or RETA. In the creature rights activists' heart of hearts, they know man is above animals. What they don't know is why. It is because man is made in the prototype of God (Genesis one:26–27).

Evolutionary Morality—Hopelessly Inconsistent

Those who start with an evolutionary view of mankind take no absolute ground for morality. Because they have no foundation, they are forced to construct a moral lawmaking that is "correct in their own eyes" (Judges 21:25). This leads to all kinds of inconsistencies.

Evolutionists arbitrarily create or concur to a moral code for humans—which, in their view, includes not using anything that comes from or was fifty-fifty tested on animals—still they believe we are but animals. And then why should we be held to this arbitrary standard that no "other" animate being is held to?

After all, no one blames a lion for ripping apart a gazelle, or a hyena for trying to steal the carcass, or microbes for finishing off the gazelle's remains. Merely somehow humans are arbitrarily viewed as different despite the insistence that we aren't different.

Consider if evolutionary animal rights groups are right in saying there is no stardom between man and animals.3 So what is to say at that place is a distinction betwixt animals and plants? Perhaps the statement should be to also refrain from whatsoever constitute use. It wouldn't take long for the animal/establish rights activists to die of starvation.

An evolutionary view of mankind and morality leads to inconsistency and confusion.

An evolutionary view of flesh and morality leads to inconsistency and confusion. It's only when we start with God's Give-and-take that nosotros get a firm foundation for morality. Nosotros are not animals; nosotros were specially and uniquely created in the prototype of God, split up and distinct from the animals (in a like manner, animals are not created like the plants either).

We are morally accountable to our Creator, and His Give-and-take has provided us with articulate guidelines of how nosotros are—and are not—to behave. Murder and theft are wrong because our Creator has decreed that we are not to impale (Genesis four:8–xi; Exodus 20:thirteen) and we are not to steal (Exodus twenty:15). Eating meat is not morally incorrect considering, after the global Inundation, God gave mankind permission to eat meat (Genesis 9:3). Jesus Himself even ate fish (Luke 24:41–43) and partook of the Passover lamb (Luke 22:7–22).

We are non left globe-trotting in an inconsistent moral sea of man'southward opinions. Starting with God'southward Word, we have a firm foundation for morality.

"Allow Them Accept Dominion"

Near creature rights groups offset with an evolutionary view of mankind. They view us every bit the final to evolve (so far), as a blight on the earth, and the destroyers of pristine nature. Nature, they believe, is much amend off without us, and nosotros have no right to interfere with it. This is nature worship, which is a further fulfillment of the prophecy in Romans 1 in which the hearts of sinful human have traded worship of God for the worship of God's creation.

But every bit people have noted for years, nature is "ruby in molar and claw."iv Nature is not some kind of perfect, pristine place. And why is this? Because mankind chose to sin against a holy God. When Adam and Eve disobeyed God's command, they brought death, suffering, and the Expletive into cosmos (Genesis two:17, 3:17).

Now all of creation groans, waiting for the coming day when Jesus will liberate it from the Curse (Romans 8:20–22; Revelation 22:iii). Cosmos was never designed to alive in disharmony. We, and the animals, were originally created to be vegetarian (Genesis i:29–30) and to live forever without whatsoever suffering or disease. But because sin changed all of that, we battle its effects every day.

But this doesn't mean that humans are a blight or affliction. Despite our sin, we are the merely ones created in the very image of God, utterly unique from the rest of creation. We were granted dominion over the globe and information technology'south inhabitants (Genesis 1:26). This was office of our "very good" (Genesis i:31), pre-Fall purpose and mission, and it stems out of our position as image bearers of the Creator.

How Should We View "Dominion"?

But does having dominion hateful that we tin treat animals whatever way that we desire to? No! Such a view stems from a misguided view of our dominion over creation. It exalts humans while devaluing the residuum of God's creation.

Does having dominion mean that we can treat animals any mode that nosotros want to? No!

You run across, God takes groovy joy in His cosmos. Half-dozen different times before He created mankind, God looked at what He had made and called it "good" (Genesis 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25). Scripture is full of celebrations of creation's beauty and God'due south treat what He has fabricated (Matthew six:30, 10:29).

And in Proverbs 12:x we read, "A righteous man regards the life of his animate being." The testimony of Scripture as a whole paints the picture of a Creator who loves and cares for all that He has made. As those made in His epitome, we should dear and care for what He has made too.

So the response here is not to point out that all of what animal activists are maxim is wrong. Nosotros need to be discerning based on God's Discussion. The problem is that the activists have gone too far, to a point where they are essentially worshipping animals.

A Balanced Position

In our world of harsh, contrasting sides, it'south often difficult to observe a balance. There'southward a temptation to autumn into either ditch: exalting animals above humans or devaluing God'due south other creations.

As Christians, we need to notice a proper balance based on Scripture. Humans alone are made in the image of God: we're unique and therefore take a unique place in God's cosmos. Jesus Himself became a man and died on the Cross to save mankind, not the animals.

This doesn't mean we tin treat the remainder of God's cosmos cruelly or abusively. We need to reflect the heart of the One whose prototype we are fabricated in, and care for His creation with kindness, directing celebrity to our Creator and Savior.

Source: https://answersingenesis.org/are-humans-animals/should-animals-have-equal-rights-humans/

Posted by: hambybuir1998.blogspot.com

Share this post