Cecil the lion's killer revealed as American dentist

[Regular_Atheist]

The dentist got the same thrill in killing the lion, as the bored 15 year old boy does when he torches a cat in the alley for fun. Only difference is the dentist pays $55k and gets a great photo.

Next year, it will be Cecil-who?

Is this supposed to be in defence of the dentist? Honestly you just made him sound like a sadist. It’s not okay to take pleasure in hurting animals.

 

[sarah_j]

I’m a Master’s level theology student…

Jesus, on the Cross, redeemed ALL creation for God the Father, not just human beings. So, I agree with you, God cares about ALL creation - Mr. Palmer and Cecil both.

Human beings needed redemption because of original sin.
Animals aren’t capable of sin.
Jesus died to save all men.

If you can show evidence in the Bible or Cathecism that Jesus died to
save animals, I’d be interested to see that.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

It’s not ‘sport’ that’s laughable. Sports have rules and degree of peer matched talents

Calling hunting “sport” is laughable, Jimmy. If it were true sport, Cecil would have been able to kill Palmer as readily as Palmer killed Cecil. And, Cecil would have had to agree to the “game” before it even began. What it was is a human of low self-esteem, detached from God, taking advantage of an innocent and protected animal. Palmer knew he was doing wrong. He paid $50,000 to the guides to show him where Cecil lived and to cut the GPS tracker off Cecil. That’s sport? You’re right: that’s laughable, or it would be if it weren’t so sad. And now to read that Cecil’s brother has been killed, will man’s inhumanity never end?

 

[GEddie]

Human beings needed redemption because of original sin.
Animals aren’t capable of sin.
Jesus died to save all men.

If you can show evidence in the Bible or Cathecism that Jesus died to
save animals, I’d be interested to see that.

What would animals be “saved” from?

Not physical death, just as we are not saved from physical death.

And whether there is an “animal afterlife” is a perennial point of contention.

ICXC NIKA

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Human beings needed redemption because of original sin.
Animals aren’t capable of sin.
Jesus died to save all men.

If you can show evidence in the Bible or Cathecism that Jesus died to
save animals, I’d be interested to see that.

Actually, Sarah, in the Bible, and in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, it says Jesus’ death redeemed ALL CREATION. That would include animals, plants, everything. Not just men or women.

 

[sarah_j]

I can only hope that there was a priest on the safari who gave
Cecil the last rites before he passed on to his heavenly award.

 

[JimmyG88]

I’m a Master’s level theology student. While it’s acknowledged that no one can actually KNOW the mind of God (God doesn’t actually have a mind per se, he just is), we DO have to attempt to figure out what the Bible means and how much Jesus knew about his own part in the divine plan, etc.

Jesus, on the Cross, redeemed ALL creation for God the Father, not just human beings. So, I agree with you, God cares about ALL creation - Mr. Palmer and Cecil both.

I can only hope that there was a priest on the safari who gave
Cecil the last rites before he passed on to his heavenly award.

What are you on about?

 

[sarah_j]

I am ‘on about’ people trying to equate the worth of a lion’s life with
the worth of human life.

Jesus did NOT die to redeem animals, as animals are incapable of sin.

All of this supposed concern for Cecil masks a twisted morality.

 

[JimmyG88]

I am ‘on about’ people trying to equate the worth of a lion’s life with
the worth of human life.

Jesus did NOT die to redeem animals, as animals are incapable of sin.

All of this supposed concern for Cecil masks a twisted morality.

What is ‘moral’ about traveling across the planet to kill an animal? The moral question is who benefits from this casual slaughter?

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I am ‘on about’ people trying to equate the worth of a lion’s life with
the worth of human life.

Jesus did NOT die to redeem animals, as animals are incapable of sin.

All of this supposed concern for Cecil masks a twisted morality.

Jesus redeemed ALL OF CREATION, not just humankind:

“The Son of God became man in order to restore all creation, in one supreme act of praise, to the One who made it from nothing. He, the Eternal High Priest who by the blood of his Cross entered the eternal sanctuary, thus gives back to the Creator and Father all creation redeemed” (Eccl. De Euch., 8).

St. Paul:

“God wanted all fullness to be found in him, and through him to reconcile all things to him, everything in heaven and everything on earth, by making peace through his death on the cross” (Col 1:15, 19-20).

ALL OF CREATION includes Cecil.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

What is ‘moral’ about traveling across the planet to kill an animal? The moral question is who benefits from this casual slaughter?

There’s nothing twisted about that, Jimmy. It’s a twisted morality that does not care.

God gave man dominion over the animals, true, but with that dominion came responsibility, responsibility to care for them in the RIGHT way, to make their lives the best they could be, to ease their pain and suffering, not to inflict 40 hours of needless pain on them. That is twisted and immoral. It’s the same as a parent leaving a toddler in a closed car in 100 degree heat for hours on end. The parent has dominion over the child, to love, honor, and care for it, not to abuse it. It’s the same with humans and animals.

 

[JimmyG88]

There’s nothing twisted about that, Jimmy. It’s a twisted morality that does not care.

God gave man dominion over the animals, true, but with that dominion came responsibility, responsibility to care for them in the RIGHT way, to make their lives the best they could be, to ease their pain and suffering, not to inflict 40 hours of needless pain on them. That is twisted and immoral. It’s the same as a parent leaving a toddler in a closed car in 100 degree heat for hours on end. The parent has dominion over the child, to love, honor, and care for it, not to abuse it. It’s the same with humans and animals.

Absolutely. The biggest day of my family’s year used to be when the man came to take away our much loved and well cared for cows to the slaughterhouse. Only then did we have money to live on I am a carnivore. I eat cow, pig (nearly all of it including the blood for black pudding) sheep, most fish and shellfish goat (a few times) and I think I dine out on enough species already without introducing, crocodile, ostrich, bear or any of the rest of it. If I eat it I would also kill it (for the table) HOWEVER! I think the killing of fabulous animals of dwindling numbers simply for the pleasue of watching it die and then adorning your home with Lion skins (or worse animal heads) is an odious pastime. And the sense of cultural superiority is breathtaking. What is called for here is extradition followed by a swift fair trial and if necessary a spell in one of Mugabe’s deepest dungeons. I hope he remembers his toothbrush

 

[sarah_j]

And the sense of cultural superiority is breathtaking.

The only superiority I see in this story is the superiority of those howling
about the inhumanity of the dentist as though he is some kind of monster
lacking their finer sensibilities and sense of right and wrong.

If the dentist broke any laws, let Zimbabwe deal with it.

It is unChristian for people to be hounding this man to death, hoping that he
loses his livelihood, and even calling for his hanging because he killed an animal.
It’s as though all the hatred that people have been storing up in their hearts is now
being emptied out on this man. It’s sick and wrong.

Lily, please note:
Jesus died to save humans beings. Animals are below human beings.
It isn’t that complicated.

Also, by definition, a lion can’t be “murdered”.

 

[JimmyG88]

The only superiority I see in this story is the superiority of those howling
about the inhumanity of the dentist as though he is some kind of monster
lacking their finer sensibilities and sense of right and wrong.

If the dentist broke any laws, let Zimbabwe deal with it.

It is unChristian for people to be hounding this man to death, hoping that he
loses his livelihood, and even calling for his hanging because he killed an animal.
It’s as though all the hatred that people have been storing up in their hearts is now
being emptied out on this man. It’s sick and wrong.

Lily, please note:
Jesus died to save humans beings. Animals are below human beings.
It isn’t that complicated.

Also, by definition, a lion can’t be “murdered”.

I genuinely hope that Zimbawe get to deal with him in their own country

 

[Peter_Plato]

There’s nothing twisted about that, Jimmy. It’s a twisted morality that does not care.

God gave man dominion over the animals, true, but with that dominion came responsibility, responsibility to care for them in the RIGHT way, to make their lives the best they could be, to ease their pain and suffering, not to inflict 40 hours of needless pain on them. That is twisted and immoral. It’s the same as a parent leaving a toddler in a closed car in 100 degree heat for hours on end. The parent has dominion over the child, to love, honor, and care for it, not to abuse it. It’s the same with humans and animals.

Lily, I am having a similar problem with your posts that I am having with Ricky Gervais’ tweet concerning Cecil, the lion.

Ricky has been very vocal about his purported moral outrage regarding the shooting of Cecil.

He tweeted that he could not imagine anything more beautiful than an adult lion and expressed his great horror that anyone could wontonly kill such a beautiful creature.



Let me help out Mr. Gervais with his struggle by offering a picture of a creature that is at least as beautiful as a full grown lion, with the potential to become capable of far more than any adult lion can even imagine – if adult lions are capable of imagining at all…

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/webdr03/2013/8/15/14/enhanced-buzz-940-1376592270-23.jpg

Now if Mr. Gervais were at all consistent in his moral outrage, surely he should be exponentially more appalled and outraged by the fact that millions of these beautiful creatures are dismembered and tossed in the trash (or cannibalized for parts before being unceremoniously disposed) every year.

Of course, Mr. Gervais is following the lead of our entire modern western culture which has clearly shown its woeful inability to direct its moral outrage appropriately.

lifenews.com/2015/07/31/abc-covers-cecil-the-lion-15x-more-than-planned-parenthood-selling-aborted-babies/

Now, it appears your moral outrage is simply following the culture within which you abide – your claims of being a theologian notwithstanding.

You have posted dozens of times to express your outrage on Cecil’s killing, but regarding the cannibalization of baby parts by PP… crickets.

Now, surely those humans who make hundreds of millions of dollars a year promoting and facilitating the dismembering of babies and trafficking in their body parts ought to be viewed – at least – through the same moral lense and with, minimally, as much outrage as a dentist who killed a lion, no?

Clearly our culture has lost its moral compass. We ought to, at least, do our best to remind each other about the most crucial moral issues begging for our attention and not allow ourselves to be distracted from those key issues.

I would suggest that Cecil is more of a distraction than it is a real moral issue, in comparison. Whereas the goings on at PP, and the current US government and judiciary’s attempt to silence those who are trying to awaken and enlighten our moral brokenness should preoccupy much more of our time, effort and good will, no?

Spend some time listening to Eric Metaxis’ radio show over the past week to get a more balanced view of what is at stake.\

metaxastalk.com/podcasts/

Especially the show with John Zmirak.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

HOWEVER! I think the killing of fabulous animals of dwindling numbers simply for the pleasue of watching it die and then adorning your home with Lion skins (or worse animal heads) is an odious pastime.

I know this has been discussed ad nauseum but since you are still stuck on this, I’ll try once more.

Given the encroachment of man it is inevitable that lions will be killed by humans to manage their numbers. There is no choice there.

Now maybe you would prefer it done in some other manner but if people are willing to pay to do what needs to be done then it’s easy to see why that’s a win-win for Zimbabwe. All that is necessary is that it be done according to the rules; the only genuine issue here is whether those rules were broken and by who.

I don’t know if anyone eats lion meat but why, given the above, would you wish to see the carcass destroyed instead of prized?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

God gave man dominion over the animals, true, but with that dominion came responsibility, responsibility to care for them in the RIGHT way, to make their lives the best they could be, to ease their pain and suffering, not to inflict 40 hours of needless pain on them. That is twisted and immoral. It’s the same as a parent leaving a toddler in a closed car in 100 degree heat for hours on end. The parent has dominion over the child, to love, honor, and care for it, not to abuse it. It’s the same with humans and animals.

No, care of wild animals is not the same as care of humans because animals are not humans.

If what you say were true meat eaters would be the moral equivalent of canibles.

The inability to make distinctions is not a moral virtue.

 

[St_Redemption]

Hunting for food and pleasure, both. Almost nobody in the modern world “needs” to hunt for food. Food is, at best, just another benefit of hunting.

People have enjoyed hunting since before the dawn of man. Ascribing to them a personality disorder is unchariable and ignorant.

To kill things simply because you enjoy killing them says something highly disturbing about yourself. If you wish to argue that mankinds history and the individuals which make up its history are highly disturbing…then I’ll agree

Tell me…you get your rocks off by shooting an animal and following it for 40 hours as it cries and wails in pain until it dies, so you can then saw it’s head off? You like that?

 

[Peter_Plato]

To kill things simply because you enjoy killing them says something highly disturbing about yourself. If you wish to argue that mankinds history and the individuals which make up its history are highly disturbing…then I’ll agree

Tell me…you get your rocks off by shooting an animal and following it for 40 hours as it cries and wails in pain until it dies, so you can then saw it’s head off? You like that?

Some – as you say – might get their “rocks off” by shooting an animal from a distance, following it for 40 hours and cutting its head off.

Others get their “rocks off” by shooting verbal arrows at a schmo, persecuting him for hours on the Internet and calling for his head on a platter when its all over.

Some people need to boost their flagging egos by hunting large animals, others by mouthing off and demonstrating their moral superiority on the Interwebz.

Same difference, really, except that the first requires a modicum of physical exertion.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

To kill things simply because you enjoy killing them says something highly disturbing about yourself. If you wish to argue that mankinds history and the individuals which make up its history are highly disturbing…then I’ll agree

No, disturbing is people getting worked up over the killing of a wild animal to the point of making death threats. Even those who have not gone that far seem entirely comfortable being part of that mob.

Tell me…you get your rocks off by shooting an animal and following it for 40 hours as it cries and wails in pain until it dies, so you can then saw it’s head off? You like that?

Nobody intended the animal to suffer for 40 hours but obviously that is a risk. Are you claiming some knowledge that the hunter could have ended the animals suffering earlier and chose to wait? Or are you simply so consumed with hatred that you are willing to imply the worst you can imagine?