I should have known better than to click on a link that a) led to the webpage of the left wing rag The Huffington Post, b) was written by Bruce Friedrich, a Vice-President of PETA and c) carries this catchy title: An Advent Reflection on God and Animal Cruelty
Because of course the Advent season is all about ending "animal cruelty", i.e. eating animals.
Yeah and it actually was nuttier than I expected. Given that the author is from PETA, that is to be expected. Check this out and pay close attention to the last sentence:
All the questions that are put forth in favor of eating animals (e.g., "Didn't God put animals here for our use?" and "What about animal sacrifice in the Bible?" and "What about the loaves and the fishes?") don't address the fundamental fact that eating God's creatures causes needless suffering. None of the common rationalizations address the points I've discussed above. None of them respond to the fact that today, eating God's creatures is inextricably linked to their abuse. If you are eating meat, you're paying others to deny God's animals their natures, and to abuse them. Even the very few organic and small farms abuse animals in ways that would be illegal if done to dogs or cats.
So the issue here is not "factory farming", it is the consumption of animals for any reason. Even small scale farming is not OK. I like his tactic of throwing out the very legitimate questions people might have, like Jesus eating fish on many occasions, God commanding animals to be slaughtered in the Old Testament and God giving animals to man to use for food (Genesis 9:3). Right after the Fall, God provided animals skins for Adam and Eve (Genesis 3:21) (and you can be sure that the animals who gave up their skins died first). Then he claims that none of those objections, which clearly show his argument to be false on its face, are legitimate and none of them address his contentions, which they do, while making no attempt to even pretend to address the issues that he himself raised. I imagine that the average reader of the Huffington Post will not notice that he points out the very facts that undermine his argument and refuses to address them.
I expect foolishness from PETA but this is both kooky and incredibly bad theology all wrapped into one. In honor of this silliness I am going to get me a bucket of KFC or something similar tonight for dinner and praise God for His providence in providing yummy animals for our sustenance.
Showing posts with label kooks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label kooks. Show all posts
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Grab your torches and pitchforks!
Oh boy. Some independent, true blue fundie (not like those other, pseudo-fundamentalists, this guy is the real deal!) is claiming some sort of unverifiable yet incontrovertible proof that John Piper is having Rick Warren as a keynote speaker at the Desiring God conference in 2010. Granted, the Desiring God 2010 conference webpage doesn't list the speakers yet but this guy is in the know! I have a hard time believing that Desiring God hasn't listed or verified the speakers on their own webpage but they did verify it to this guy with an axe to grind with Piper, with John MacArthur, with Al Mohler, with the Sharper Iron blog, with....well with everyone apparently.
Ugh. Maybe this is true, more likely it is not. It sounds out of character for Piper. It certainly is not verified (although one commenter suggests that perhaps Piper is not saved based on this unfounded rumor). I will reserve any judgment on this until we hear from Dr. Piper. Regardless, this blog posting of a rumor is further incentive to steer clear of people who are more concerned with being "Jen- Ewe - Wine!" fundamentalist than pretty much anything else.
Ugh. Maybe this is true, more likely it is not. It sounds out of character for Piper. It certainly is not verified (although one commenter suggests that perhaps Piper is not saved based on this unfounded rumor). I will reserve any judgment on this until we hear from Dr. Piper. Regardless, this blog posting of a rumor is further incentive to steer clear of people who are more concerned with being "Jen- Ewe - Wine!" fundamentalist than pretty much anything else.
Friday, December 04, 2009
The ESV = a Commie Pinko Bible?
Yikes. I read this and just cringed, Blessed are the conservative in Bible translation.
The Gospel of Luke records that, as he was dying on the cross, Jesus showed his boundless mercy by praying for his killers this way: "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."
Not so fast, say contributors to the Conservative Bible Project.
The project, an online effort to create a Bible suitable for contemporary conservative sensibilities, claims Jesus' quote is a disputed addition abetted by liberal biblical scholars, even if it appears in some form in almost every translation of the Bible.
The project's authors argue that contemporary scholars have inserted liberal views and ahistorical passages into the Bible, turning Jesus into little more than a well-meaning social worker with a store of watered-down platitudes.
"Professors are the most liberal group of people in the world, and it's professors who are doing the popular modern translations of the Bible," said Andy Schlafly, founder of Conservapedia.com, the project's online home.
As a conservative, theological and political, this is ridiculous and frankly embarrassing. When I read this I start to know what liberals feel like when Dennis Kucinich is speaking. They aren't just aiming at the TNIV and other modern, gender bending translations but even the English Standard Version, a favorite among subversives like me and my fellow Reformed believers (a group known for being lib'rals)
"The phrase 'theological conservative' does not mean that someone is politically conservative," said Schlafly, who lives in Far Hills, N.J.
This liberal slanting, Schlafly argues, ranges from changing gendered language — Jesus calling his disciples to be "fishers of people" rather than "fishers of men" — to more subtle choices, like the 2001 English Standard Version of the Bible, which uses "comrade" and "laborer" more often than the conservative-friendly "volunteer."
When I read the ESV and see "laborer", I automatically think of communism. He is right about this much, a theological conservative is not always a political conservative. I assume that Schlafly doesn't get the irony of twisting the Bible to suit your own agenda in response to liberals doing the same thing. I wonder if anyone has explained the difference between "exegesis" and "eisegesis" to Mr. Schlafly?
(I just noticed that Eric Carpenter beat me to the punch. I must be getting slow.)
The Gospel of Luke records that, as he was dying on the cross, Jesus showed his boundless mercy by praying for his killers this way: "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."
Not so fast, say contributors to the Conservative Bible Project.
The project, an online effort to create a Bible suitable for contemporary conservative sensibilities, claims Jesus' quote is a disputed addition abetted by liberal biblical scholars, even if it appears in some form in almost every translation of the Bible.
The project's authors argue that contemporary scholars have inserted liberal views and ahistorical passages into the Bible, turning Jesus into little more than a well-meaning social worker with a store of watered-down platitudes.
"Professors are the most liberal group of people in the world, and it's professors who are doing the popular modern translations of the Bible," said Andy Schlafly, founder of Conservapedia.com, the project's online home.
As a conservative, theological and political, this is ridiculous and frankly embarrassing. When I read this I start to know what liberals feel like when Dennis Kucinich is speaking. They aren't just aiming at the TNIV and other modern, gender bending translations but even the English Standard Version, a favorite among subversives like me and my fellow Reformed believers (a group known for being lib'rals)
"The phrase 'theological conservative' does not mean that someone is politically conservative," said Schlafly, who lives in Far Hills, N.J.
This liberal slanting, Schlafly argues, ranges from changing gendered language — Jesus calling his disciples to be "fishers of people" rather than "fishers of men" — to more subtle choices, like the 2001 English Standard Version of the Bible, which uses "comrade" and "laborer" more often than the conservative-friendly "volunteer."
When I read the ESV and see "laborer", I automatically think of communism. He is right about this much, a theological conservative is not always a political conservative. I assume that Schlafly doesn't get the irony of twisting the Bible to suit your own agenda in response to liberals doing the same thing. I wonder if anyone has explained the difference between "exegesis" and "eisegesis" to Mr. Schlafly?
(I just noticed that Eric Carpenter beat me to the punch. I must be getting slow.)
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Hell hath no fury...
...like a cultist being mocked!
I guess cult leaders Victor Hafichuk and Paul Cohen don't like being mocked and having their false teachings called out. After a couple of posts on Lee Shelton's website, they suddenly came back with a lengthy diatribe condemning Lee, me, Spurgeon, Augustine among others with being false teachers (Uh, Mr. Kettle, there is a Mr. Pot on the phone, something about you being black...) If I am listed in the same category as a giant of the faith like Charles Spurgeon, I must be doing something right.
On a more serious note, some of cult leader Hafichuk's followers post their testimonies. This one, from Ingrid Benson, is heart-rending and shows starkly the fruits of following a cult leader.
Her children lost, her husband dead, her parents estranged from her, all the result of failing to be properly obedient to Victor. One of the hallmarks of cults is to seperate people from friends and family to better control them, and this "testimony" follows that exact pattern. Coming out of a cult like mormonism myself, the similarities between Hafichuk and Joseph Smith are eerie. I thought that men like this could not be successful in the world anymore, but that has been proven wrong. Pray for these men, and especially for their deceived followers, that they may come to know Christ and be freed from the shackles of this cult.
On a more serious note, some of cult leader Hafichuk's followers post their testimonies. This one, from Ingrid Benson, is heart-rending and shows starkly the fruits of following a cult leader.
Her children lost, her husband dead, her parents estranged from her, all the result of failing to be properly obedient to Victor. One of the hallmarks of cults is to seperate people from friends and family to better control them, and this "testimony" follows that exact pattern. Coming out of a cult like mormonism myself, the similarities between Hafichuk and Joseph Smith are eerie. I thought that men like this could not be successful in the world anymore, but that has been proven wrong. Pray for these men, and especially for their deceived followers, that they may come to know Christ and be freed from the shackles of this cult.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Is it possible to miss the point more than this guy?
What in the world is possessing people to do this?
Philippine devotees nailed to cross
SAN FERNANDO, Philippines (AP) -- Philippine devotees re-enacted Jesus Christ's suffering Friday by having themselves nailed to crosses in rites frowned upon by church leaders in Asia's largest predominantly Roman Catholic nation.
Fernando Mamangon, 37, was among the first of some 30 men scheduled to go through the Good Friday rites in three villages in northern Pampanga province's San Fernando city. Five other devotees, including a woman, were nailed to crosses in nearby Bulacan province.
It was Mamangon's 13th straight year for the rite, which penitents endure to fulfill a vow or pray for a cure for illnesses.
"I started having myself nailed to the cross in 1995 because my eldest son got sick and almost died," Mamangon, clad in a maroon robe with a crown of vines and thorns, said minutes before he was nailed to a wooden cross on a dusty mound in Santa Lucia village....
The yearly tradition has become a tourist attraction, especially in San Fernando's San Pedro Cutud village, which sometimes draws thousands of local and foreign tourists.
Aside from the cross nailings, scores of men pound their bleeding bare backs with bamboo sticks dangling from ropes in a flagellation rite meant to atone for sins.
Aniceto lamented that a surge of vendors and tourists has injected too much commercialism into Holy Week celebrations.
But Mamangon vowed to continue with the practice handed down by his late father, who was nailed to the cross 15 times.
"After being nailed to the cross, I feel so refreshed, like all my sins are washed away," Mamangon said. "I will continue this until my son Alex is cured."
How are the sins of Christians atoned for? By getting ourselves nailed to crosses? Maybe if people bothered to read their Bibles, they might come across these clues...
Romans 6:10 For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.
Hebrews 7:27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.
Hebrews 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Let's think about that, we are sanctified through the offering of Christ's body once for all. Note that it doesn't say we should go and get ourselves crucified in order to feel our sins washed away. What these people are up to is not any form of Christianity, but is rather a pagan mysticism peppered with Christian terms. If we could sanctify ourselves by our own actions, our own righteousness, there would have been no need for Christ and His perfect obedience. Praise God that He sent His Son, to do for His elect what they are unwilling and unable to do for themselves.
Someone ought to hook these guys up with some Cadbury Eggs and Peeps, that is closer to the spirit of Easter than nailing oneself to a cross.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
The dangerous world of junk email
You have to be careful checking into your bulk email folder. Nestled amongst spam for Irish lottery winners and cheap pharmaceuticals, I came across an even more odious email. The subject line of the email said it all....
WOW! So I read the text of the email, being a glutton for punishment...
Spurred on by some morbid fascination, I went to the webpage. Who knew that I had the blood of martyred saints throughout the ages on my hands! And who knew that heretic Michael Servetus is one of God's saints and servants, while John Calvin is not! The entire article really deals strictly with Calvin and Servetus. Mr. Cohen rather cavalierly claims the ability to refute Calvin's doctrines, but makes no real attempt to do so in his treatise (and given the juvenile quality of their writings, I doubt he could even articulate what Calvin taught much less refute it).
Two issues jump out at me, one with whether complicity with the killing of Servetus makes Calvin a non-Christian and the other with whether or not the failings of Calvin the man negate the teachings of Calvin the theologian.
On the first. True, Servetus was a heretic and was killed and Calvin was in part at fault. It is also true that Servetus was a heretic who denied the Trinity. Calvin was right that Servetus held to a false philosophy but was wrong to have any part in his death. Does that mean that he is cut off from Christ? Are there any Christians who have committed sins, including murder? You better believe it. I seem to remember a fellow, a man after God's heart, who had a man killed so he could have his wife. Was David not a believer?
On the second, holding to Calvinism does NOT mean slavishly following Calvin in everything he taught or believed. I think that Calvin was completely wrong about infant baptism. Does that mean I am not a Calvinist? Hardly. We follow Christ and the teachings of the Bible, and Calvinism as a system is the system that best compiles and systematizes the various doctrines of the Bible into a coherent system. We follow Calvinism not because of Calvin, but because of Christ. Are there Christians who do not buy into Calvinism? Sure, and that doesn't mean that they aren't Christians.
Mr. Cohen and associates seem to paint with a pretty broad brush across the spectrum of Christianity in their list of false teachers, ranging from men like John Piper and Billy Graham to Rick Warren and Benny Hinn. Like so many groups, it seems that anyone who doesn't walk in lockstep with them falls into the false teacher category. I mean, John Piper is a false teacher? And the reason given that Piper is a false teacher in the subtly titled "Piping a Most Hideous Melody"? Because he teaches the doctrine of an eternal, real hell which is a radical idea held by...well every Christian for the last two thousand years.
I will now give you something specific to read there, after having had a chance to look over the site you sent me, www.desiringgod.org.
What did I find? A desert, a nuclear waste desert. I see the kind of death and destruction that only man can perform. I know this seems like hyperbole to you, exaggerating something you do not even believe to be true in the first place. You have found inspiration at John’s site, a little oasis perhaps. I do know, however, that truth can be found everywhere in men’s churches and religious works, and that it is the subtle and hidden error lacing the truth in those things that kills, as when Satan tempted Eve with lies couched in godly terms.
One of the biggest and worst lies ever told in man-made Christianity, one that John Piper subscribes to and teaches, is that there is a place of interminable torment and punishment for sinners. Men think to find this doctrine in the Bible, but while it is something the carnal man would wish on others, it is surely not something God has ever said or that ever entered into His mind. He made creation as an act of His love. He so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son for it. We are His, bought and paid for by His blood. Would you make something in your own image, let us say conceive a son, knowing and purposing in advance that you would be consigning a sentient being, your very own flesh and blood, to torment that will never cease? What did Jesus say on the cross? “Father, burn them all in hell forever”? Or did He say, “Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do”? Do you think His prayer was heard and honored? Jesus said that the Father always hears Him because He does that which pleases the Father.
Mr. Cohen and company apparently subscribe into a doctrine of eventual universalism, that all men will eventually be saved, that hell in only temporary. That is one of their many un-Biblical beliefs that they list that comes dangerously close to cult territory (they even try to respond to the question of whether they are a cult, and their response does little to deflect that question)
The Good News is not that everyone gets into heaven without exception, but that in a world of men doomed by their own rebellion and sin Jesus Christ came to save some from eternal hell and give them eternal life. Universalism is any form does violence to the mercy and grace of Christ and His effectual sacrifice for His sheep.
The webpage of "The Path of Truth" is a disturbing look into the world of those who claim "secret" knowledge of the things of God, in direct contradiction to the teachings of the Bible. Everyone who holds to a view that doesn't jive with this "secret" knowledge is of necessity a heretic and false teacher. I pray that Mr. Cohen and Mr. Hafichuk and their followers come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, repent of their false condemnation of Christians and humbly submit to Jesus Christ as Lord.
Beware the emails in your spam file, they are probably there for a reason.
The Fruit of Cain Multiplied: The Murderer John Calvin
WOW! So I read the text of the email, being a glutton for punishment...
The following paper will be of interest and pertinence to you for possibly several reasons among many. It has been our great honor to discern and identify the error and spirit of John Calvin, whose rule is yet propagated in the hearts of men with evil consequences for all. The Lord Jesus Christ has visited us with the Light of His countenance to put an end to this evil, justifying His servants whom Calvin murdered, and His Name in the sight of all.
The Fruit of Cain Multiplied: The Murderer John Calvin
Show me whom you follow, and I will know what manner of person you are or will become. If you do not know whom you are following, don't you think it is time to find out how and where you are being led? Do you think you will altogether escape the consequences because ignorant? Think again. You already suffer them.
John Calvin was one of the most vicious of wolves ever to pose as a lamb of God. His supremely self-righteous spirit lives on in those who lionize and follow him, even unbeknownst to themselves. Truly, "that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God."
Paul Cohen & Victor Hafichuk
http://www.thepathoftruth.com/ The Fruit of Cain Multiplied: The Murderer John Calvin
Show me whom you follow, and I will know what manner of person you are or will become. If you do not know whom you are following, don't you think it is time to find out how and where you are being led? Do you think you will altogether escape the consequences because ignorant? Think again. You already suffer them.
John Calvin was one of the most vicious of wolves ever to pose as a lamb of God. His supremely self-righteous spirit lives on in those who lionize and follow him, even unbeknownst to themselves. Truly, "that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God."
Paul Cohen & Victor Hafichuk
Spurred on by some morbid fascination, I went to the webpage. Who knew that I had the blood of martyred saints throughout the ages on my hands! And who knew that heretic Michael Servetus is one of God's saints and servants, while John Calvin is not! The entire article really deals strictly with Calvin and Servetus. Mr. Cohen rather cavalierly claims the ability to refute Calvin's doctrines, but makes no real attempt to do so in his treatise (and given the juvenile quality of their writings, I doubt he could even articulate what Calvin taught much less refute it).
Aside from any discussion of doctrines, by this criterion alone John Calvin was a false prophet of the first order. How do we know? Because he condoned and excused, when not initiating it himself, the persecution and murder of those who opposed his doctrines and position. These are not the good fruits of a man of God.
We need not even prove the falsehood of Calvin’s doctrines to identify him as preeminent among the many false teachers professing Christ, though we can do that too. What the Lord gave us in this one simple directive is more than sufficient for judging this man by his fruits. One such as Calvin who kills others because they differ with his beliefs is a murderer.
Two issues jump out at me, one with whether complicity with the killing of Servetus makes Calvin a non-Christian and the other with whether or not the failings of Calvin the man negate the teachings of Calvin the theologian.
On the first. True, Servetus was a heretic and was killed and Calvin was in part at fault. It is also true that Servetus was a heretic who denied the Trinity. Calvin was right that Servetus held to a false philosophy but was wrong to have any part in his death. Does that mean that he is cut off from Christ? Are there any Christians who have committed sins, including murder? You better believe it. I seem to remember a fellow, a man after God's heart, who had a man killed so he could have his wife. Was David not a believer?
On the second, holding to Calvinism does NOT mean slavishly following Calvin in everything he taught or believed. I think that Calvin was completely wrong about infant baptism. Does that mean I am not a Calvinist? Hardly. We follow Christ and the teachings of the Bible, and Calvinism as a system is the system that best compiles and systematizes the various doctrines of the Bible into a coherent system. We follow Calvinism not because of Calvin, but because of Christ. Are there Christians who do not buy into Calvinism? Sure, and that doesn't mean that they aren't Christians.
Mr. Cohen and associates seem to paint with a pretty broad brush across the spectrum of Christianity in their list of false teachers, ranging from men like John Piper and Billy Graham to Rick Warren and Benny Hinn. Like so many groups, it seems that anyone who doesn't walk in lockstep with them falls into the false teacher category. I mean, John Piper is a false teacher? And the reason given that Piper is a false teacher in the subtly titled "Piping a Most Hideous Melody"? Because he teaches the doctrine of an eternal, real hell which is a radical idea held by...well every Christian for the last two thousand years.
I will now give you something specific to read there, after having had a chance to look over the site you sent me, www.desiringgod.org.
What did I find? A desert, a nuclear waste desert. I see the kind of death and destruction that only man can perform. I know this seems like hyperbole to you, exaggerating something you do not even believe to be true in the first place. You have found inspiration at John’s site, a little oasis perhaps. I do know, however, that truth can be found everywhere in men’s churches and religious works, and that it is the subtle and hidden error lacing the truth in those things that kills, as when Satan tempted Eve with lies couched in godly terms.
One of the biggest and worst lies ever told in man-made Christianity, one that John Piper subscribes to and teaches, is that there is a place of interminable torment and punishment for sinners. Men think to find this doctrine in the Bible, but while it is something the carnal man would wish on others, it is surely not something God has ever said or that ever entered into His mind. He made creation as an act of His love. He so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son for it. We are His, bought and paid for by His blood. Would you make something in your own image, let us say conceive a son, knowing and purposing in advance that you would be consigning a sentient being, your very own flesh and blood, to torment that will never cease? What did Jesus say on the cross? “Father, burn them all in hell forever”? Or did He say, “Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do”? Do you think His prayer was heard and honored? Jesus said that the Father always hears Him because He does that which pleases the Father.
Mr. Cohen and company apparently subscribe into a doctrine of eventual universalism, that all men will eventually be saved, that hell in only temporary. That is one of their many un-Biblical beliefs that they list that comes dangerously close to cult territory (they even try to respond to the question of whether they are a cult, and their response does little to deflect that question)
The Good News is not that everyone gets into heaven without exception, but that in a world of men doomed by their own rebellion and sin Jesus Christ came to save some from eternal hell and give them eternal life. Universalism is any form does violence to the mercy and grace of Christ and His effectual sacrifice for His sheep.
The webpage of "The Path of Truth" is a disturbing look into the world of those who claim "secret" knowledge of the things of God, in direct contradiction to the teachings of the Bible. Everyone who holds to a view that doesn't jive with this "secret" knowledge is of necessity a heretic and false teacher. I pray that Mr. Cohen and Mr. Hafichuk and their followers come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, repent of their false condemnation of Christians and humbly submit to Jesus Christ as Lord.
Beware the emails in your spam file, they are probably there for a reason.
Saturday, May 05, 2007
Monkeying around with human rights
Animal "rights" kooks in Austria are trying to get a chimpanzee declared a person...
In a case that could set a global legal precedent for granting basic rights to apes, animal rights advocates are seeking to get the 26-year-old male chimpanzee legally declared a "person."
Hiasl's supporters argue he needs that status to become a legal entity that can receive donations and get a guardian to look out for his interests.
"Our main argument is that Hiasl is a person and has basic legal rights," said Eberhart Theuer, a lawyer leading the challenge on behalf of the Association Against Animal Factories, a Vienna animal rights group.
The arguments are all very innocent sounding, arguing that by making him a person he can receive property and that would make it easier to provide for his care. But the name of the organization, Association Against Animal Factories, belies the innocence of their request. These radical people want to remove all distinctions between humans and animals, and no doubt eliminate all use of animals for food and medical research. So much for the unique status of humans, made in the image of God and given dominion over the earth.
Something else interesting. The care of this chimp is $6,800 a month or almost $82,000 per year. That would certainly provide more than adequate food and shelter for a couple of families of people, that instead is being spent on the care of a chimp. But to these "compassionate" people, money spent on feeding a chimp pastries and providing him with a TV is a perfectly rational use of $82,000 a year.
I assume that even in Europe this will go nowhere, but it is a sign of things to come, as radicalized fringe groups go mainstream. This is the proverbial camel's nose under the tent, and as soon as they can get one chimp declared a person, they will seek the same rights for every animal. It is no different here with seeking to chip away at hunting and trapping rights by emotional, uneducated appeals to suburbanites who think that steaks magically appear in the grocery store. It also serves as a warning to the U.S. to not get too entangled with European legal precedent that could some day be used to overturn U.S. laws because of crazy legal rulings in Europe.
This is the impact of abandoning God's Word. When you cast out the literal six days of creation in favor of an evolutionary framework, it only makes sense to grant animals rights. After all, humans are just an evolutionary by-product and not unique at all. Why shouldn't they have fundamentally equal rights with animals?
Animal "rights" kooks in Austria are trying to get a chimpanzee declared a person...
In a case that could set a global legal precedent for granting basic rights to apes, animal rights advocates are seeking to get the 26-year-old male chimpanzee legally declared a "person."
Hiasl's supporters argue he needs that status to become a legal entity that can receive donations and get a guardian to look out for his interests.
"Our main argument is that Hiasl is a person and has basic legal rights," said Eberhart Theuer, a lawyer leading the challenge on behalf of the Association Against Animal Factories, a Vienna animal rights group.
The arguments are all very innocent sounding, arguing that by making him a person he can receive property and that would make it easier to provide for his care. But the name of the organization, Association Against Animal Factories, belies the innocence of their request. These radical people want to remove all distinctions between humans and animals, and no doubt eliminate all use of animals for food and medical research. So much for the unique status of humans, made in the image of God and given dominion over the earth.
Something else interesting. The care of this chimp is $6,800 a month or almost $82,000 per year. That would certainly provide more than adequate food and shelter for a couple of families of people, that instead is being spent on the care of a chimp. But to these "compassionate" people, money spent on feeding a chimp pastries and providing him with a TV is a perfectly rational use of $82,000 a year.
I assume that even in Europe this will go nowhere, but it is a sign of things to come, as radicalized fringe groups go mainstream. This is the proverbial camel's nose under the tent, and as soon as they can get one chimp declared a person, they will seek the same rights for every animal. It is no different here with seeking to chip away at hunting and trapping rights by emotional, uneducated appeals to suburbanites who think that steaks magically appear in the grocery store. It also serves as a warning to the U.S. to not get too entangled with European legal precedent that could some day be used to overturn U.S. laws because of crazy legal rulings in Europe.
This is the impact of abandoning God's Word. When you cast out the literal six days of creation in favor of an evolutionary framework, it only makes sense to grant animals rights. After all, humans are just an evolutionary by-product and not unique at all. Why shouldn't they have fundamentally equal rights with animals?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)