Animals are more important than people

[Verbum_Caro]

I was going to entitle this “Animals are more important than people!” but didn’t want to mislead anyone into thinking that I subscribe to that view. I really ought to phrase it in the form of a question:

“Are animals more important than people?”

Lately I’ve noticed what I think is an increase in the outrage expressed by people over the plight of / harming of animals. In some of these cases the outrage seems justified, i.e. calling for the prosecution of someone practicing systematic animal cruelty.

But, I am detecting a new level of anger – anyone else notice this? Recently there was a video released of a young woman throwing puppies into a river. By and large the response has been suggestions on how to horribly punish this girl, ruin her life, physically injure her, torture her, or murder her. Sometimes all of the above.

What is going on here?

I have this suspicion that the moral outrage and the call for physical retaliation stems from some sort of pathology. Has our social conscience been poisoned by our acceptance of abortion such that our (good) instincts to protect the innocent have been transferred to animals? And furthermore since our conscience regarding preserving human life has been so deadened that our collective response to someone hurting an animal is to call for their murder. . .

Anyone have any thoughts on this? I’m reminded of the anecdotes regarding thieves and liars who take great pains to return library books or tell the truth in certain matters . . . are we trying to over-compensate?

VC

 

[Ridgerunner]

I have this suspicion that the moral outrage and the call for physical retaliation stems from some sort of pathology. Has our social conscience been poisoned by our acceptance of abortion such that our (good) instincts to protect the innocent have been transferred to animals? And furthermore since our conscience regarding preserving human life has been so deadened that our collective response to someone hurting an animal is to call for their murder. . .

Anyone have any thoughts on this?
VC

Don’t want to ruin the thread, but I would say you buttoned it, exactly.

 

[Miserys_Fence]

You need only look as far as online news stations/newspapers that allow for “comments” on stories. Look at any story where a child was molested and/or killed, and take a look at how many posters call for castration, dismemberment, slow torture, etc. of the perpetrator.

In short, it’s the motives of the perpetrator, not the species of the victim, that causes such an outcry. I don’t want the teenagers (true story from my area) who beat a baby alpaca to death “just for fun” roaming the streets any more than I’d want a child molester running loose. The cowardly impulse to inflict injury upon and/or “dominate” something smaller and weaker is the real issue, regardless whether the “something smaller and weaker” is human or animal.

Miz

 

[Mark77]

**When it’s legal & accepted by many to murder their own baby by abortion, then anything goes!

As Dostoyevsky wrote in his classic novel “The Brothers Karamazov”, “Anything is permissible if there is no God.” **

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

I was going to entitle this “Animals are more important than people!” but didn’t want to mislead anyone into thinking that I subscribe to that view. I really ought to phrase it in the form of a question:

“Are animals more important than people?”

Lately I’ve noticed what I think is an increase in the outrage expressed by people over the plight of / harming of animals. In some of these cases the outrage seems justified, i.e. calling for the prosecution of someone practicing systematic animal cruelty.

But, I am detecting a new level of anger – anyone else notice this? Recently there was a video released of a young woman throwing puppies into a river. By and large the response has been suggestions on how to horribly punish this girl, ruin her life, physically injure her, torture her, or murder her. Sometimes all of the above.

What is going on here?

I have this suspicion that the moral outrage and the call for physical retaliation stems from some sort of pathology. Has our social conscience been poisoned by our acceptance of abortion such that our (good) instincts to protect the innocent have been transferred to animals? And furthermore since our conscience regarding preserving human life has been so deadened that our collective response to someone hurting an animal is to call for their murder. . .

Anyone have any thoughts on this? I’m reminded of the anecdotes regarding thieves and liars who take great pains to return library books or tell the truth in certain matters . . . are we trying to over-compensate?

VC

In a word: you’re right.

Okay. Two words. Same deal.

 

[LoyalViews]

When it’s legal & accepted by many to murder their own baby by abortion, then anything goes!

As Dostoyevsky wrote in his classic novel “The Brothers Karamazov”, “Anything is permissible if there is no God.”

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

Amen.

It seems that people believe the notion that animals are equal to humans. This is not true. Though we should not abuse or mistreat animals, we must remember that they are not human, and have amterial souls, not immortal souls. They can not go to heaven when they die. Animals can not think like we do, they can not sin - nor do they have a developeds (developed) conscience lie we do. The fact of the matter is, as cute and lovable as animals are (and I love animals myself), we can not treat them like a human, or equate them to a human, and that is that.

 

[Rascalking]

No, they’re not more important than people.

I personally believe that there is some method of salvation for animals. Perhaps we’ll see them if we’re in Heaven, I don’t know-last time I was in Heaven I was a bit preoccupied!

What I find funny is that some people “know that no animals are in heaven”. Really? How so? God tell you? You just smarter than all of us? Are you God? Wow. What an arrogant thing to say.

The other answer is wrong as well-“All animals go to heaven!” Well, we can hope this, but we don’t know that either.

I’m biased. I’m a dog nut who loves animals. I clearly have a, well-you know what in the fight (couldn’t resist, sorry). I’m deeply concerned with the plight of the unborn, the hungry, the homeless, and animal rights as well.

 

[andyandely1997]

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.

A paragraph from the Catechism. And how much do we spend on pets?

 

[Sonic]

No, they’re not more important than people.

I’m deeply concerned with the plight of the unborn, the hungry, the homeless, and animal rights as well.

I don’t know if you’ve ever seen the bumper sticker that says, “Save the baby humans!”. It usually has a picture of a fetus or a new born on it. It has to be one of my favorite car stickers.

 

[Sonic]

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.

A paragraph from the Catechism. And how much do we spend on pets?

I recently saw a PBS report about a biologist or doctor in Africa. Disease was spreading from the human population to the gorilla population through the unsanitary conditions of the village and it’s dump. What she discovered was that if you take care of the humans, then the health of the animals in the area got better. She improved the conditions of the village, and the gorillas became healthy again. Animal rights people have it backward. You take care of the humans first, and the animals will follow. After all, God does most of the work taking care of the animals anyway. We do very little.

The thing is that Catholics know that taking care of each other is important. This is no secret, but it’s funny that science had to rediscover it. God has a reason for everything.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Definition of insanity: a nation that will not allow anyone to step on a turtle egg, but permits newborns to be cut apart as they are emerging from their mothers’ wombs.

 

[JaneGrey]

You need only look as far as online news stations/newspapers that allow for “comments” on stories. Look at any story where a child was molested and/or killed, and take a look at how many posters call for castration, dismemberment, slow torture, etc. of the perpetrator.

In short, it’s the motives of the perpetrator, not the species of the victim, that causes such an outcry. I don’t want the teenagers (true story from my area) who beat a baby alpaca to death “just for fun” roaming the streets any more than I’d want a child molester running loose. The cowardly impulse to inflict injury upon and/or “dominate” something smaller and weaker is the real issue, regardless whether the “something smaller and weaker” is human or animal.

Miz

This

Its not about having more value for an animal over a child, it is about the kind of person who commits such despicable acts of cruelty.
There is nothing eccentric, un-Christian, silly or ‘New Age’ about being outraged upon hearing news of animal abuse or torture.

 

[JaneGrey]

Definition of insanity: a nation that will not allow anyone to step on a turtle egg, but permits newborns to be cut apart as they are emerging from their mothers’ wombs.

I dont think that anyone should be permitted to do either.

 

[severus68]

You need only look as far as online news stations/newspapers that allow for “comments” on stories. Look at any story where a child was molested and/or killed, and take a look at how many posters call for castration, dismemberment, slow torture, etc. of the perpetrator.

In short, it’s the motives of the perpetrator, not the species of the victim, that causes such an outcry. I don’t want the teenagers (true story from my area) who beat a baby alpaca to death “just for fun” roaming the streets any more than I’d want a child molester running loose. The cowardly impulse to inflict injury upon and/or “dominate” something smaller and weaker is the real issue, regardless whether the “something smaller and weaker” is human or animal.

Miz

Exactly.

 

[severus68]

I was going to entitle this “Animals are more important than people!” but didn’t want to mislead anyone into thinking that I subscribe to that view. I really ought to phrase it in the form of a question:

“Are animals more important than people?”

Lately I’ve noticed what I think is an increase in the outrage expressed by people over the plight of / harming of animals. In some of these cases the outrage seems justified, i.e. calling for the prosecution of someone practicing systematic animal cruelty.

But, I am detecting a new level of anger – anyone else notice this? Recently there was a video released of a young woman throwing puppies into a river. By and large the response has been suggestions on how to horribly punish this girl, ruin her life, physically injure her, torture her, or murder her. Sometimes all of the above.

What is going on here?

I have this suspicion that the moral outrage and the call for physical retaliation stems from some sort of pathology. Has our social conscience been poisoned by our acceptance of abortion such that our (good) instincts to protect the innocent have been transferred to animals? And furthermore since our conscience regarding preserving human life has been so deadened that our collective response to someone hurting an animal is to call for their murder. . .

Anyone have any thoughts on this? I’m reminded of the anecdotes regarding thieves and liars who take great pains to return library books or tell the truth in certain matters . . . are we trying to over-compensate?

VC

I think there should be more expressions of outrage at such cruelty, whether to humans (children) or animals. People should be angry and outraged. The expressions of suggested punishments are just a reaction. As has been said here, you would find similar verbal responses/responses to child cruelty/abuse. I don’t see what this has to do with the support of abortion. Many of us who love animals and abhor cruelty to animals are pro life. We are pro all life.

 

[Newbie2]

No, they’re not more important than people.

I personally believe that there is some method of salvation for animals. Perhaps we’ll see them if we’re in Heaven, I don’t know-last time I was in Heaven I was a bit preoccupied!

What I find funny is that some people “know that no animals are in heaven”. Really? How so? God tell you? You just smarter than all of us? Are you God? Wow. What an arrogant thing to say.

The other answer is wrong as well-“All animals go to heaven!” Well, we can hope this, but we don’t know that either.

I’m biased. I’m a dog nut who loves animals. I clearly have a, well-you know what in the fight (couldn’t resist, sorry). I’m deeply concerned with the plight of the unborn, the hungry, the homeless, and animal rights as well.

Gotta be careful with use of this term. If you are a champion of animal welfare, welcome to the club. If you support “animal rights”, that needs to be carefully defined. In my experience most of those who are self-proclaimed “animal rightists” really are “animal welfare-ists”. Using “animal rights” ***can ***mean that one ascribes certain “rights” to animals that belong to humans.

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.

A paragraph from the Catechism. And how much do we spend on pets?

Gotta be careful not to suggest that spending money on pets is a bad thing…it’s a matter of proportion, methinks. Money that people in my area spend on veterinary care for their pets allows me and my family to eat and for me to send them to a Catholic High School.

Definition of insanity: a nation that will not allow anyone to step on a turtle egg, but permits newborns to be cut apart as they are emerging from their mothers’ wombs.

Yeah, that’s it in a "nut"shell. Pun intended, sadly.

How are things in Bitter Clingersville?

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Gotta be careful with use of this term. If you are a champion of animal welfare, welcome to the club. If you support “animal rights”, that needs to be carefully defined. In my experience most of those who are self-proclaimed “animal rightists” really are “animal welfare-ists”. Using “animal rights” ***can ***mean that one ascribes certain “rights” to animals that belong to humans.

Gotta be careful not to suggest that spending money on pets is a bad thing…it’s a matter of proportion, methinks. Money that people in my area spend on veterinary care for their pets allows me and my family to eat and for me to send them to a Catholic High School.

Yeah, that’s it in a "nut"shell. Pun intended, sadly.

How are things in Bitter Clingersville?

One eye on Earl, the other on God…

 

[Dale_M]

I have this suspicion that the moral outrage and the call for physical retaliation stems from some sort of pathology. Has our social conscience been poisoned by our acceptance of abortion such that our (good) instincts to protect the innocent have been transferred to animals?

I am not so sure. Our collective love of animals, and visceral reaction to their abuse, seems (to me) to be related to our tendency to see them as honorary children. Think of how may persons consider their pets to be part of the family, or refer to their pets as “my fur babies.”

And at a certain level this makes sense: pets are huggable, you can play with them, they show emotions, they need training and discipline etc. And they give affection to those they love. The same, however, can’t be said about a fetus. I realize it is common in the pro-life community to refer to a fetus as a baby, but for many persons this is a comparison which rings false, both rationally and emotionally.

I think our greater intolerance for animal abuse may relate to many things, such as our increased affluence (more leisure time and more money to dote on pets) , our increased longevity (well past the age of child rearing, leading to seeing pets as surrogates), our increased willingness to talk about child abuse and feel the anger over those incidents. etc. But I am not sure increased acceptance of abortion has much to do with increased outrage over animal cruelty, although I can understand why pro-lifers see this as ironic.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

We don’t just SEE this as ironic. It is.

 

[phoenixrrt62]

Well, I don’t think that animals are MORE important than people, but I know some people who think they are, my neighbor being one of them.

I understand in the bible that there’s a passage that says that man has dominion over the creatures of the earth? I’ve seen people twist that to justify abuse of animals…
Do I think animals should be mistreated and abused? No. They are creatures who feel pain, have emotion, have a soul…we don’t have the right to mistreat them…are they BETTER than humans…well, no.

I think sometimes animals ACT better than people, but I digress…
ahem…sarcasm, in case you are not aware…

Interesting article…along the lines of this thread…
guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/may/12/post83

Is it misguided society? DK.
Perhaps b/c animals are cute, cuddly and predictable? Hum.

I wonder sometimes about…us humans projecting our desires of how animals act, are represented, etc.
Wishful thinking or something? food for thought…
Look at people who think they can go into a lion’s cage and ‘pet’ the lion or “swim” with a crock or a polar bear. Yeah, that’s a bit extreme, but…you have to wonder.