Rant away my friend. I am behind you on this one

*whimper* Scary...

were no different from animals...heck supposly at the top since we use tools to keep us there...no tools were just as boned as the other animals.

*clap*

It should be noted that if you actually read the Bible, the idea is much more along the lines of 'you have to take care of animals because they can't take care of themselves like we can', not 'use them for whatever you want, we can always get more!' It's more on the shepherd idea than the butcher or the pet owner. :|

This is pretty much true. Ofcourse I still want ecclesates (sp?) 3 explained to me. In that it sounds like god is saying "your no better than the animal"

*checks her bible, brb with response*

Check his last sumission. Pokey quoted it.

I assume you are referring to Ecclesiastes 3:19 - 22...

"19. For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth the beasts; even one thing befalleth them; as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast; for all is vanity.
20. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.
21. Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?
22. Wherefore I perceive that there is nothing better, than that a man should rejoice in his own worksl for that is his portion: for who shall bring him to see what shall be after him?"

...from the Bible I had on hand, which happened to be 'The Holy Bible For Little People (King James Version)'. The emphasis is from the book, not me.


Now, oftentimes when they say 'beast' in the Bible, they refer to that untangible aspect of evil in man that is often mistaken to mean 'the Devil' (as in the Number of the Beast). However, the use of plural form here would suggest that either A) they are, indeed talking about animals, or B) it is incorrectly translated. Assuming that the King James is translated correctly, it really only leaves us with one solution.

Now, Ecclesiastes is mostly about how humanity cannot truly know the past or the future, and so should take pleasure in the 'now' and in their own works and profits. Taken with that meaning, 3:19-22 seems a little out of place with the rest of the book. However, if you read a little more carefully, you'll see that Ecclesiastes is also talking about how man cannot truly know all of God's creation, in that God Himself created it and man is merely a mortal creature. So, I think what it's saying is not so much that man is no better than an animal in God's eyes, but that man cannot truly know whether he is or not, more important than a beast. And that just because man is charged with shepherding God's creations, does not mean he is better than them; he is still one of them and if something destroys all of the animals it will destroy him too. I think the purpose of the passage is to remind Christians of their own mortality, and to remind them that they are created from the same lifeless dust as everything else and that only God gives them life, not anything that they do.

It is a very interesting passage, though, and could be interpretted in a myriad of ways.

Oh, and I especially like 3:21, don't you? For humanity cannot truly know if men go to Heaven, or if animals go to Hell. I love it when the Bible reminds people that it's not infallible and is in fact written by men, even if the men were spoken to by God. Ecclesiastes is a great chapter for that :>

I dont know where animals go but I know they have a soul. I have had to put a couple to sleep when they were suffering (I let the vet do the prep work but they are mine and my responsibility so I do the final steps) I have seen the soul leave with the last breath. I can feel it. I pray if there is any divine justice I want to go where the animals go when I die so I can be with my mare. Even if I am just a caretaker in heavens stables that would be heaven to me.

You know, I was halfway through Revalations trying to find you a comforting quote when I realized something: the only reason humanity is not living in God's kingdom already is because of Adam and Eve's fall from grace. However, animals never did fall from grace, having never eaten of the Tree of Life; so I think that all animals must be inherently innocent in God's eyes, and all go to Heaven.

There does seem to be an issue where men who eat the flesh of an animal sacrificed to an idol go to Hell, though, so it might be that animals sacrificed to idols go to Hell as well. I am not sure though, and have no quotes to support my theory. I would hope not, seeing as how it was not the animal's choice to die, but fairness in God's eyes and fairness in men's eyes is not always the same thing.

fanatics rarely ever take the time to actually study and meditate. and they typically base their opinions on the actions of men, rather than what the scriptures say unfortunately...

Listen to your preacher, don't read the Bible! It's all too confusing, you wouldn't understand anyway. Humans are infallible, didn't you know?

*solemn nod*

Reading your responses to this picture was a very enlightening endeavor--thanks!

I liked what you had to say about the verse in Ecclesiastes--you said everything I wanted to say but better and much more well informed. :D -admiring-

Glad to be of service. *hat tip*

Yeah, that was stated in this pamphlet too. We've been assigned as shepherds of the earth and everything on it... which is an understandable thing, as we're the most advanced, and we're changing the world in ways no one else can.

But still, it's not some right we have, and we need to be respectful. I don't think claiming that it all belongs to us, that it was created FOR us, even, is very respectful. It sounds awfully selfish. Just as when one person's ego is inflated enough that they perceive the world as being their oyster... when we as a species have the same (mis)conception, it has some pretty negative implications.

It seems really hypocritical to me to keep saying "be kind to animals, show them compassion, treat them with fairness and love" but also say "animals were given to us to serve as companions, as slaves, and as food, and nowhere in the bible does it say it's wrong to kill them"

and nowhere in the bible does it say it's wrong to kill them

I wanna know why you're picking on Christianity, when people have been hunting animals for food far before the Bible ever existed.

It's very frustrating to see people use Christianity as a convenient scapegoat. It's also very bigoted. There are tons of cultures out there who view animals as chattel, and always have, long before Christians ever walked the earth (and many Christians view animals with a lot more reverence than you think), yet you find it easy to target Christianity, because it happens to be prevalent in the country you live in. It's a big world and there are more cultures out there than just Eurocentric ones. :/

Humankind as a whole has this problem, i agree with you that it's not just christians - i also won't argue that some christians don't share this, and do in fact revere other animals.
But... being immersed in a christian culture myself (america) no doubt contributes to shaping my perspective. I have not lived in say, any middle eastern or muslim cultures for example, so even if i read about them i would still not feel that presence around me the same way nor observe its negative impact in my everyday life.

And people have hunted since we first stood upright, for sure. But this isn't about hunting... And besides, i think the wrongness lies in a person feeling he or she has the right to another's life, as if it belongs to them. It's arrogant. Possession is something that shouldn't extend to the inclusion of thinking, feeling beings who have wills of their own... We own possessions, but we don't own other people anymore... supposedly that practice was abolished.
I think what it always comes down to is that the majority of humankind does not recognize anyone but themselves as 'people' and therefor see them only as posessions. And the reason i pick on christianity is because it promotes this belief. Like i said, since i live in a christian land, i hear that voice predominantly. Art is the expression of my perspective on how i see the world... as it probably is for many people... So naturally it reflects on my observations.

I know you're strongly christian, so i apologize if you find all this offensive... But by no means am i going to stop expressing the offense I feel at your religion's impact on our culture... so try not to take it too personally i guess.

OMG YOUR ICON IS SO CUTE I HAVE BEEN WATCHING IT FOR LIKE TEN MINUTES NOW WKFJDSLKJFSDLKJALK *dies*

rofl.. ^___^ Aww, thank you! I'm glad you adore it so! :D

Technically, given the order things were created in, we were created for them, to take care of, provide for, and promote their welfare :3

I like that reversal better. :D

But the bible is often misunderstood and deliberately interpreted according to the human convenience.

Have you watched the documentary "The Root of All Evil?"

According to the bible:
Animals are things
Woman are slaves
you have to kill everyone who disagrees with the bible
you have to kill your son if he does not submit to you
you have to kill animals because god likes it
and
God loves us so much that he have given us two choices 'OBEY ME OR GO TO HELL!' and this is freedom of choice!
*sighs*
What are we going to do after we realize that the religion that promised us salvation does not save us from our own ignorance?
After the last wild animal is dead and the delicate balance of environments is destroyed forever, there will be no god coming to save us...

No, I haven't, but this sort of thing is the reason why there is a difference, these days, between the words 'religion', and the words 'faith' and 'spirituality'. I know many, many Christians who are wonderful people, who READ the Bible rather than *interpreting* it... and I know of a coupe who do whatever their minister tells them. I think the majority of Christians are people of FAITH, not religious people, but you're right when you say that religion saves no one.

I understand your point

I almost freaked out when the pope said that Europeans should have more children and they were selfish by not having children...
COME ON! the world is becoming a trashcan! Instead of having more children why not adopting! THERE'LL BE NO ONE TO SAVE US! We have to use logic and good sense to save ourselves!
My act of charity and faith is to have no child unless I feel I can make this person happy with a nice world to live in.

Bring a little consumerist that needs tons of plastic toys and junk to be pseudo-happy is not my idea of being altruist. ¬¬

And I think I am being ANYTHING but selfish by NOT HAVING CHILDREN...

Well, I know why the Pope would suggest that Europeans should have more children; Europe has an abysmal birth rate and there's a lot of doomsday talk being thrown around about the population being wrecked when the older generation dies off.

Look around! look what is happening to the planet as a whole!

Instead Americans, Asians and people from the middle east should do that as well!

All the people in the Earth today could, if they really really wanted to, fit in the British Isles with plenty of room left over in Ireland for land-fills for the next 10,000 years. The planet is not, "OMG Iz Drowning In Peoplez, Wur mi Soylent Greenz!??"

Things are really, really shitty in and around crowded cities; in and around heavy industrial plants, and in and around major resource extraction sites.. but those places make up a minute fraction of the surface of this world even considering two-thirds of it is already covered in un-drinkable salt-water. Granted we should take measures to clean-up those places and make sure they pollute less in the future, but those are local problems and if you ever bother to go out into 'Fly-Over country' in the US and tell them the planet is dying they will look around at their clear blue skies, their clean running streams, their green-green grass of home and tell you to your face that you're full of it.

Also, take a look at where the population rates are going down and where they're going up. In Scandanavia, Europe, Japan, and even in America they've either leveled-off or are in rapid decline. These are places where the average person has a fairly high standard of living. Where are birthrates high and getting higher? The third world, where people have some of the shittiest standards of living on the globe. There is a well-known correlation between population-stress and reproduction-rates, in other words these places are not shit-holes because they are over-populated.. they're over-populated because they are shit-holes.

So keep tossing rice and condoms at the people for all the good it'll do, but don't you even think of trying to build a factory and offer them a job. "How Dare you interfere with these people's native culture, where will Bono go for his quaint photo-ops now?"

I don't know whether you're desperate or dumb to believe this bullshit.

Look for proves of what you're saying.

Yeah.. Have you ever been to any country of the 3rd world?

NO! You have NOT!
And all your rhetorical bullshit is very well written!

WE MUST REPRODUCE UNTIL EVERYTHING IS FUCKED UP! YEAH!!! Woohoooo!

and take for granted the popes word because HE IS PERFECT! YEAH!!!

We MUST CONSUME THE WHOLE WORLD! BECAUSE LORD WILL HAS GIVEN US UNLIMITED NATURAL RESOURCES!

And for lord's unlimited wisdom we shall WASTE THE NATURAL RESOURCES UNTIL ITS END AND PRAY FOR MORE!

Because EVERYONE MUST LIVE JUST LIKE AN AMERICAN!

Global warming?
Nah, I just watched George W. Bush documentary "A convenient lie" and he defends that the global warming is very nice! Because none likes winter...
Besides, only poor people died on the last hurricanes and who the fucks care for poor people? NONE! They cannot BUY THINGS!
For BUYING THINGS is the very true meaning of life!!

Yeah! Hell YEAH! How could I be so misinformed!

Thanks lord you have enlightened me!

And besides, the AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE is so great!

WOOHOO! Tokyo is a shit-hole, isn't it?
Yeah, it's not overpopulated.

Enough with that...

believe whatever you wish, I do not have the wish to talk to you ever again.
And instead of saying so much crap, you could point where I went wrong without prejudice and misinformation.

Become an hero
Like I care

Who said anything about breeding untill we eat the earth out from under us? I didn't. I'm saying the overpopulation problem isn't the Great and Ominous Menace[tm] it's cracked up to be by scare-mongers.

No, Tokyo isn't a shithole. It's also not overpopulated, it's just crowded. Ever notice how when the over-population scaremongers reach for stock footage they'll almost always reach for images of teaming hordes of brown-people in a Bangladeshi market before the images of teaming hordes of white-people at the New York Stock Exchange? Nevermind that many of the places cited for overpopulation scare-mongering have population densities similar to North American Suburbs.

Global-Warming? A bit of a non-sequitar but I'll bite. Ohnoes! We is teh-ruinators of the Enviromovement!! We all gunna die cuz Teh Ebil BusHitler won't buy Carbon-Credits!

Is Global-Warming happening? Most likely. Is it the result of Human-activity? Doubtfull. Can human activity stop or reverse it? Doubly doubtful. If Global-Warming were a Human-centric phenomena then why would temperatures be going-up all across the solar-system where no SUVs have gone before?

Ever hear of something called an 'Opertunity Cost'? That's when by committing resources to one course of action you deny yourself the ability to take another action. One of the most distressing things about the Global-Warming Debate in my eyes is that it's almost entirely either-or. Either it isn't happening At All, or it is happening and It's All Our Fault! Nobody seems to accept as credible the idea that it is happening, it's not our fault, and there's absolutely nothing we can do to stop it. Nevermind there are instances of dramatic climate shifts on this planet Within Human-Recorded History! (Google or Wiki the Medival Warm Period and the Little Ice Age)

Remember what I said about Oportunity Costs? If there is no global warming and we throw alotta resources at shutting-down carbon emissions, we've been inconvnienced and we look a little silly. If, however, there is Global-Warming and it's tied to human carbon-emissions then we win! If instead there is Global-Warming and it is inevitable, all those resources we burned-away throwing Carbon-Credits back and forth instead of bracing for the climate-change leave us with alot more than egg on our faces.

Carbon-Credits are themselves a joke. The idea behind this racket as I've been told is to use market-forces and profit-motive to promote 'green' policies through the invisible-hand of Capitalism, how lovely, since a market for carbon-credits will make some companies develop carbon-neutral technologies so they can have credits to sell, then these technologies get spread around and everything is hunkey-dorey.

Problem:

If the Carbon Credit market is lucrative enough to motivate research into Carbon-neutral technologies, what motive is there to spread these technologies around and thus destroy the Carbon Credit market?

Problem:

Carbon-Credits have to be cheep enough to be considered more profitable than eating whatever 'Carbon-Tax' gets laid upon industry or the cost of lobbying legisators to give them a break. If they're that cheep, how can they be lucrative enough to make other companies want to actively produce them?

BIG Problem:

The way the 'racket' works now, you can get Carbon-Credits for efficiency improvments you did on your own long before the scheme was a gleam in Al Gore's eye that had a by-product of reducing carbon emissions, and others can get Carbon-Credits for their industries when said industries already have naturally low carbon-footprints.

The end result, a whole lotta money changing hands for little or no result. Al Gore can ride in his 'Carbon-Neutral' private jet and celebrities can ride their limos to the 'Carbon-Neutral' Academy Awards but YOU have to ride your bike 6 miles to do your grocery shopping at a 7-11.

And finally, we are NOT running out of resources. We're running out of the easy-to-get-at (re: Cheep) resources, there's a difference. If thinks keep going we'll either suck it up and keep going, only everything will be more expensive, or someone will develop something that relies on a new and as-yet untapped easy-to-get-at resource that'll be so much cheeper than the current paradigm it'll easily replace it. Look at who's doing much of the research into Ethanol, Bio-Diesel and fuel-cell technology these days. *Gasp! It's the Evil Oil-Companies!

Probably tilting at windmills laying all this out, but I feel better for it. Cheerio.

Fact:I am angry at the pope.
I prefer to not discuss it further for I seek isolation.

You're correct that the birth-rates in third world countries are a lot higher, and those populations are expanding more than those of developed countries.

But why is this?

It's because we have education. And we (to an extent) have a dim understanding of limits, even though plenty of Americans for example, still breed out of control... having three or four children or more.

Either way, if there are 7 billion human being on earth (i think it's supposed to be something like that now) that's 6 billion too many.

The human population is still expanding, be it in impoverished areas or not... and it's not making things any better. We'd have a lot fewer problems if we knew how to control ourselves.

I think it's funny (not the lol kind of funny though) how we humans think we're so awesome that we can control and regulate the breeding habits of domestic animals and wild populations... playing god, as if we know what we're doing.
But we can't keep our own population under control!

Having a child is just about the most selfish thing anyone can do. Why not adopt first? Is it not selfish to turn the other cheek to the rest of the world's problem... and then add to it yourself?

I will agree that a couple that has trouble concieving going to the fertility-clinic before going to the adoption-center is increadibly selfish, but I firmly reject the idea of having children in and of itself being a selfish act.

The Earth is Big, It's fantasitcly, Stupidly Big! We're not even close to overpopulating this place. Think of how big a human being is, think of how many of them you can stuff shoulder-to-shoulder and head-to-foot in a place like New York City... now find NYC on any Globe.

I think the difference between those having more children and those having less isn't so much 'knowing better' as 'having better things to do'. Some of the most selfish, insensitive people in the topmost rungs of society only have one or two kids on average.. if That many. The ones turning themselves into living baby-factories tend to be of much more modest means. There is a correlation there, between standard of living and birthrate, but I'll be buggered if I can nail down what precisely the causation is. In any event ending poverty and hunger and 'overpopulation' in the 3rd world will not be accomplished by throwing rice and condoms an cash at it and having Bono do touchy-feely tours to 'raise awareness' of things we've known for decades now. It'll require building schools, hospitals, houses, roads, utility and communication infrastructure... and making it all stick despite what tribal warlords or screaming-meemees want. It'll also likely mean that those quaint mud-hut villages you see on rich people's post-cards will likely go the way of the dinosaur, but I'd consider that a fair trade for giving everybody a shot at a comfortable standard of living.

I didn't even read your posts, I do apologize if I offended.

I don't feel any hope for mankind.

I've had words like these (almost verbatim) slung at and around me enough that it amuses more than it offends. Sorry you didn't read my posts, was hoping you could find something at least a little educational under all my snarkiness.

how about the will to have a happy life YET feel sorry EVERY day for your sins? how u live happy life then?

Oddly enough, we *ARE* all god. Each and every one of us, a fragment, an aspect. A portion. The arrogance is in thinking that only *MANKIND* is god. When in truth, every single spec of dirt, every atom, every creature large and small, with opposable thumbs and without, are an image of god. I certainly do understand your rant, and agree with it, on the grounds that what you have shown in your collage, is the common misperception that the majority of people have.

So sad.

ROCK ON! :D It's almost spooky to hear someone share my _exact_ perception of what god and creation itself consists of. I simply worship the earth and all it contains, becuase that is where I came from and will go back to someday. *hugs*

You aint alone, bubba. You aint alone AT ALL. I'm finding a lot of folks are tuning into this perception. Read some books by david neal walsh, "Conversations with god." books 1, 2 and 3. There are some pretty eye opening observations in there, even if you don't beleive in the premise of how the books came into existance! *Happy horsie hug dance!*

Everything is touched by the higher power and nature has a force its own. You learn that as a farmer. As for me if they cant burry me in the ground directly next to my horses that went before me then burn me and put my ashes there I came from the earth and I shall return. I do not want to be put in a box.

<a href="http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3Lm15c3BhY2UuY29tL21vdmVmb3JjaGFuZ2U="><img src="http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/6075/zeitgeistbannerkz5.png"/></a>http://static.furaffinity.net/styles/default/images//smilies/wink.png
http://static.furaffinity.net/style.....ilies/wink.png

Or more easily stated, everything combines to make one. The level of perception that everything and everyone is separate is one without divinity. ;) On a higher level on consciousness, everything is perceived as a whole and there is no "self". ^__^

... wait, I'm getting off topic... uh.. plants, animals, humans, dirt, sky, oceans, lava - all are connected and essential for the whole that is the Earth, part of the universe. :D

you are right on topic. and right you are. that is the basic message. There are MANY ways to say that very same thing. You put it very well. very succinctly. Quite to the point! I get a bit wordy, don't I? :)

hehehe.. maybe, but that's a good thing! ;)

Right on!

The sad thing is, it's exsited before Christianity and it exsists outside of christianity. I hate to see you so focused on that one group, but they are the squeakiest wheel.

I assure you if christianity would faal to peices today you'd still be able to throw a rock and hit another culture, religion, profit driven enterprise, etc. and find this same mentality.
Christianity is one of the squeakiest wheels but there are others, many more. You should expand your thinking.
I hope "burning" churches isn't on your checklist of things to do to improve upon the situation. You want to help? Educate, demonstrate and help instill empathy and kindness. Hate begates hate. Intollerence begets intollerence. I understand the emotions but I'd hate to see you get stuck on them adn consumed by them.

On a random note, I find it interesting that it was God's original plan and will that no animal eat the other, including man. Thumb through the Old Testiment. There was no need for bloodshed. It was upon Adam and Eve's sinning that that paradise was lost and the toil of survivial by means of the flesh of another was introduced. If anything that's a testiment in my mind to the ballance that should be struggled for. The path of least harm as Coug puts it. Nature's figured it out, humanity, for the most part, is struggling.

Yeah, I hear you. I mean, take a look at any of the religions that ever indulged in ritual sacrifice. A lot of the 'Indian-based' or 'Middle-Eastern-based' (that sounds so very racist, but I don't know how else to group a bunch of religions together) are not only all over the 'man is better than animals' but also the 'man is better than woman', so :/

Sacred white cows! D:

Violent acts don't help a situation, so no... i don't plan to burn anything at all. But that comment should be a good indication of my frustration.

Humankind as a whole is this mentality, because anyone who doesn't actually think about it will look around them and see cities and works of art and all the things we've done and say "wow, we must be special." I agree, it would still be present if christianity and all those other sub-religions that have the same God went away... but images, like the thrust of a sword, have more power if they have a single focus.

Humanity has a lot of growing up to do, and that's the problem... we're children, and we haven't learned how to be yet. I have a little bit of hope, but it's hard to have more than that with as far as we've strayed...

things that you claim make your watchers run for the hills are the things I love to get closer to and look at the detail :)

I wasn't wild about the collaging when I first saw it, but once I read the explanation and saw that it was a religious pamphlet, I'm suddenly okay with it ;)

many many many kudos for being bold and daring to upload controversial things like this.

Don't you just love it when people listen to and act on what their imaginary friend says?

I love how deep this is. yeah thats one of my mainy hates on the church. telling me animals have no soul or emotion....grrrr

Right on. We're truly not all that different from any of the other creatures on this planet, and ALL life should be treated with the same respect. It's sickening what blind justifications people find for their actions, be it religion or simply the callous belief that animal's "don't feel" as we do (which is, of course, as anyone who's shared their life with a pet before has probably realized, a load of bullshit).

PS - Would it be alright with you if I wrote a thing about this in my blog, and posted it there (with a link back to this page, obviously, and all due credit to you)? I really really am loving this, and would love to share it with folks outside the scope of FA.

Yeah, go for it. :)

Not gonna write a book in response as I am running on less than 4 hours sleep right now...but just know that I agree with you.

Very powerful piece.

"burn churches"

*Get's the fire arrows* IT"S BITCH BURNIN' TIME!!!!

Tell me when and were.

Now, now, hate doesn't accomplish anything more than create more hatred. ;)

oh don't be silly. :P

*flails* my stomach's empty.. D: artist's daily needs are not met.. *hurries off the make weenie dogs* :p foood! (this completely irrelevant post brought to you by Wacme™)

*Save the annimals all big and small, man will be the Gaia's fall*

Scarily, that sounds fairly accurate.. I think "ignorance/ignorant" should fit in there somewhere, because it's usually the blissfully uncaring who do the worst damage. ;)

Alright time to throw my perpective into this labryinth of a melting pot.

"a god" created this world and the heavens(space and everything else)

Science has proven so far that you cannot destroy matter, or one thing transforms into another due to a reaction.

Theology proves that it would be Illogical for there to be a state of nothingness, for nothingness is something of substance.

The BIBLE, KORAN, and any other religous book out there were writtnen by SINFUL men. This would make the BOOKS, sinful? Yes.

Gaya in a sense could be the Brahma of the world(s)/space and everything else....The "Superman" which we all can attain through self meditation and reconciling.

So in a sense, we all are part of this one being. We all are fragmented with smaller and larger portions. We all make mistakes because of our impurites. We must accept one day we all die. For every beggining there is an end. Our existance will be for an eternity, for everything cannot become nothing, since previous stated.

What the envisionment of a heaven would be none of us truly know and could exactly tell. For none of us can die and be reborn....at least to our knowledge.

Simply stating the HOLY BOOKS are corrupt they are a life outline on what you should consider doing. They are more or less like a governmental ethics standard before there was truly a GOVERNMENT. This is how people SHOULD interact with eachother and BEASTS/ANIMALS. An ELECT group of people were chosen to write this....NOT the GENERAL SOCIETY AS A WHOLE. THIS IS WHY THINGS ARE FLAWED AND FUCKED UP.

I have had one somewhat spiritaul experience and I believe there is a gaya like soul out there which we all gravitate towards, which each individual in ther life looks towards the sky in search of this being, with hopes and some disamy. I believe I have gotten an answer...without using and drugs and have had a visual seeing of a shooting star in a response to a question in dispair, of a listening/caring soul(to you astro buffs, a meteorite). I believe there is something, and most of humanity know in general, or should KNOW what we should be doing, but is either too ignorant or to arrogant to pay attention to the true meaning of life. Live for the bettermant of ourselves physically, mentally and for the bettermant, of others(including man, woman, and plant/animal/eart). We all are on the same ship, We either float it or sink it.


.Snook

excuse my mispellings and poor sentances...working on my typing skills

Interesting...I love the compilation....This is so heart wrenching.... And beautifully sad.

Wrong target audience.

Stick the prints in the prayer books at a church.

I was always taught that animals are 'fur people', and are to be treated as such.

Still, I'm not all for those goofy old ladies that pamper their pets so much that they become unhealthy and obese....that's taking it a bit too far. But I do believe that you should give your pet(s) everything they need to live happily...including love, play, and companionship. Just a like a human, an animal needs more than food and shelter to survive.

*applauds loudly*

"Thou shalt not kill" does not apply to murder of one's own kind only, but to all living beings; and this Commandment was inscribed in the human breast long before it was proclaimed from Sinai." ~Leo Tolstoy
I wish more people would think about being vegetarian. :{ Meat isn't even that good for a human, and it's not essential, as it ONCE might have been. We no longer require animal skins for our clothing or protection, we do not require their bones for tools, and we can obtain the vitamins and nutrients they provide from non-animal foods.

Exactly! We don't have to anymore... so why do we? Just because it seems more convenient? Because it seems cheaper? Those are really lousy reasons to justify a holocaust.

No, it's not that - it's that it's so deeply ingrained in our society that it's challenging to overcome. A lot of people are not raised knowing what goes on behind the scenes of their steak. As a matter of fact, so many meat companies use the animals they kill as their happy, content looking mascots that I think people must believe the animals themselves are happy to give up their lives for our food. It's a social conditioning that will take time to overcome - but some people aren't afraid of the truth, and some people have compassion, and are not willing to take part in such an ugly and cruel industry. People don't /want/ to think of the suffering they put in their mouths - it tastes good and it doesn't /look/ like a cow/pig/chicken anymore so who cares, right? And some people truelly /do/ believe that the animals on Earth are under man's dominion and that we are some sort of superior species, possessing superior (rather than different) intelligence. Some people don't even know that we /are/ primates - as in, we belong to the 'monkey' family as much as any gorilla in the zoo. People don't indentify with animals because they are not conditioned to - beyond cats and dogs, and the protection that domestic animals have is still very 'new' in the scheme of things.
Sorry to get so long-winded there. I don't like it anymore than you do - but in some way, I understand. I was also raised eating meat and never realized the /horrible/ things that went on until I was older, and able to do my own research. I have always supported animals myself and I love them - and even through my own bias and affection for animals I still ate them with little thought to the suffering behind it all. But I did change that mentality, and I did research, and I came to understand. I hope that some day /all/ of us can come to these conclusions, open our eyes and realize how fruitless it is to continue this deplorable industry.

It seems to be an increasing awareness... part of me honestly thinks that if we survive ourselves and don't blow the world up our society will eventually come to accept other animals as different but equal.
Though it's probably a long way off... i think we're ahead of our time.
One thing that seems pretty true to me, and really hits hard is that "as long as we have slaughterhouses, we'll have battlefields too" And while that may not make sense at first... it really is pretty profound i think. Because whether we consciously acknowledge it or not, i think a part of who we are as humans realizes that other animals have worth as people too... and to kill one kind of person isn't radically different than killing another - Whether your goal is to rule a land or to fill the meat-case at a supermarket.

I fully, fully agree. Extending one's awareness is always a good thing - and you're right, the awareness is increasing. I don't think we'll ever see the day in our lifetime, or even our grandchildren's lifetimes, but a time will come when we will finally accept the fact that we are all living things and are equal, and that we must treat eachother kindly because all we have is this tiny planet in this tiny galaxy, in a huge, lonely universe.
But yes, I also think that we would value /eachother/ more if we valued /all/ life, and perhaps the murdering, the raping, the torture and intentional pain, the war - perhaps all of it would end. It's nice to dream about, anyway. For now I'm content to not take my part in the industry, to speak out against it, and do what I can to show other people how positive it is to switch your culinary alignment.

No offense, but you're really being very patronising and belittling to people who include meat in their diet to assume we are just ignorant, and there couldn't possibly be ANY other reason we'd eat meat.

Wrong. A lot of pepople who eat meat know perfectly well what goes on in large, barbaric factory farms, and a lot of them don't agree with it any more than you.
Im a huge animal welfare advocate, but I eat meat. However, I only buy meat from small, rural, local farms where I have met the animals personally, know the farmer, and know the animals are kept in fantastic conditions and not factory farm torture chambers.

It IS possible to eat meat and love animals and feel strongly about animal welfare. Do NOT assume that if you're not a vegetarian, then you're just an ignorant brain washed moron.
If you wish to be that extreme, I could complain that you are not a vegan, or that a vegan is not a fruitarian, and that each one is neglectful of another living things plight.

I personally adore animals, more than people, but I also acknowledge and respect the food chain. I have no problem with eating another animal, as we are designed to do. As long as that animal hasn't had to suffer and has had a good life, there is nothing more ANY of us can ask.

No offense taken, firstly. I never expected anyone to reply to this comment LOL considering it was posted 2 months ago. :P
Firstly, I commend you for going the extra mile to ensure that you don't buy meat from an animal that was abused and tortured in an intense factory farm. I applaud that, and I would LOVE to see more omnivores making the same choice. At least to choose humanity over cruelty is a good thing.
Secondly, upon writing this comment, I actually /am/ vegan - made that switch a little over a month ago. However, I'm far from a fruitatarian by far, and I realize that even though I am trying greatly to lessen my impact, I am still making an impact. Does that make sense? For instance, I understand that I can go to my favorite local store and buy a package of vegan peanut satay, and my money is still going into a compact that also sells meat. My dollar is still hitting the industry, so to speak. But in a different market - actually, having given it much thought I have no problem even buying my local name-brand stuff that is suitable for me to eat, as it increases the demand a little for a wider vegetarian market.
Anyway. Thank you for being a compassionate omnivore. It's too bad more people don't at least go your route.

I have to agree with you honestly on a lot of this. It is utterly rediculous to believe that only humans have a soul, only humans have rights to life and happiness, only humans have a culture and language. BULLSHIT! I have personally seen the societies and laws governing the wild animals in our world. They are every bit as important and relevant as humans, if not moreso.

The thing I don't get is people gong way over off the other end of it, militant veegans and such. Humans are built to be omnivores for a bloody reason you know. There are many animals (not just primates) who are omnivorous. Bears for example? Though many are either strict herbivores or strict carnivores. If it weren't for the carnivores, herbivores would seriously overrun their habitat and very quickly find themselves in a downward spiral of starvation, disease, and death. But, because humans have decided to remove the natural predators from a balanced ecosystem, we have to replace those predators somehow. Which is why I don't get the militant anti-hunting crowd either. DEER ARE NOT AN ENDANGERED SPECIES for crying out loud! They breed like bloody rabbits! Plus, fish and game take a sensus of given populations and only sell enough tags to keep the population under control, not to decimate or cut their numbers below a healthy level. They're not trying to eraticate the species after all, they're trying to keep the animals healthy.

But of course, you can't tell them that. Blah. I come from a Native American background, and that Hunter-Gatherer society is my heritage and is something I fully understand. It's trophy and sport hunters I have serious issues with. One rule I find that works pretty well: If you kill it, you eat it. Don't kill it if you have no intention of eating it. This goes for ALL vertibrates, and quite a few invertibrates as well. There is ONLY two reasons to kill something/someone: Food and Self Defense. Humans are the ONLY animal that does not follow this rule, and it is a paramount law of nature, in my personal observations.

This is just my view though, take it as you will.

I'm not against hunting by default, because obviously it is natural... animals hunt. We were a society of hunters once, and it was normal then too. But... being a hunting society now is no longer possible because we have about 6 billion too many people.
But i also think that granting life to a creature specifically for our own benefit - only to make it live in squalor for a short and unnatural period of time to then be killed - is abominable. When a thinking, feeling being is given life and a pricetag, and then made into a product... it's about the most disrespectful thing i can imagine.

A product doesn't have a soul... how can something with a soul be a product? I can at least respect some hunters because they respect what they kill. (as in, when they need it to live.) But i too don't really think sport hunters are among those.

I believe that since we have pretty much chosen as a society to withdraw from the rules of nature and its checks and balances (would you agree that we do that?) we should be responsible and have some compassion. I don't disagree that a lion needs to kill to live... but a human has the means to avoid this natural necessity, at least in our unnatural society.

Actually, in all reality, we do need to kill to survive when it comes to food, as omnivores that do eat meat. Something must die for us to eat, that is unavoidable. I agree that the assembly-line meat processing in society is beyond grotesque. Animals are not treated humanely, nor are they killed in such a way as to cause as little discomfort as possible. But, sad though it is, humans, like the lion or wolf, must kill to survive.

Personally, I would rather raise my own food animals or hunt my own food. At least then I would know that:
1. I know the food animals I raise are raised healthy and happy and well cared for and that they are killed quick and clean.
2. The animals I hunt would be me helping to cull the old, injured, etc from the herd, just as the wolf would do with deer or anything else. Thus helping to maintain the strong, fast, and healthy to survive to breed the herd stronger, as they should be.

But yes, human society has pretty much ignored the laws of nature and tried to rewrite the book. I also agree that humans should be responsible for what we have done and show compassion for all creatures, just as people like Steve Irwin did throughout his life.

"But i also think that granting life to a creature specifically for our own benefit - only to make it live in squalor for a short and unnatural period of time to then be killed - is abominable"

I agree.
But Im not a vegetarian, nor do I have any desire to become one.

I boycott such horrendous animal treatment by only buying ethically sourced, properly raised meat from small, local farms who treat their animals well.

Why do a lot of vegetarians assume that meat from huge, factory farms is the only way to get meat? There IS an ethical alternative: free range, independant farms. Yeah, its more expensive but meh. You don't have to support animal cruelty to eat meat.

Hmm.. I know what you're saying,and I somewhat agree. I absolutely hate hunters. I can't stand people that starve,or hurt animals. I beleave all religous fanatics out there need to pick up an elementry school science book,and read some real proven facts. But as far as the vegetarian thing goes,hey what ever works for you dude. As for me I was born with these teath that were made especially for the eating of meat,and that means that just like a lot of other animals,I need it in some way for my own development. Besides,it is a scientificly prooven fact that we owe the development of our higher brain functions due to the fact that our species started consuming meat early in our evoliutionary development. So you see it isen't a matter of placing value on any one species. It's simply nature. I don't like it,but at least we aren't ripping things to shreads,and eating them alive the way most of the animals on the planet do. Like you said. We are animals too after all. So why is it that it's just fine for other omnivores to eat meat,and not fine for us to do it?

Well, i'm not saying i think you should stop... i accept the fact that other people don't feel the same as i do. Buuut, in my opinion, it's not fine for us to kill for the simple reason that we don't have to. It's not necessary anymore, we have technology, we have knowledge... isn't this what makes us a civilization? But 'civilization' is not very civilized when it still revolves around inequality, killing, and compassionlessness (i'm sure that's not a word..)
We do it because the industry makes sure we believe that it is necessary... because the industry is based on profit. So, we kill because of greed, that's what it comes down to.

You make some good points.This all made me kinda curiouse,so I did a web search so I could see for myself what you were talking about.I found a couple sites that had pictures of what happens inside of a slaughterhouse.It was very disturbing to say the least,and I would strongly advise anyone that's gonna try that not to be eating when you do it. I probably won't stop eating meat because of it,but I will deffinatly cut back.The thing that realy pissed me off was the absolutely pointless horse slaughter industery.I sencearly hope that everyone that owns,or operates such a phacility finds themselfs trapped in a pin,and trampled by the animals they would slaughter "Poetic justice"

Again, you're implying people only eat meat because they're brainwashed into it.

Please credit meat eaters with some more intelligence. I am not brain washed by anyone. I eat meat because I like it, I have no moral objection to animals dying as long as they're killed humanely and had a good life (unlike most of the animals in nature that are just ripped to bits while alive, our methods in an ethical, small farm are far superior to anything nature dishes out!) and I enjoy eating meat. I feel in reasonable/sensible amounts it is good for you. Maybe not 100% NECESSARY for everyone (though I would honestly believe that some people NEED meat, and that it would be impossible to expect everyone on earth to ever go vegan, as we're all far too different with such diverse cultures) But yeah....not brain washed, not ignorant, not void of compassion. I think you'll find this true of most omnivores.

Animals are intelligent beings. I'm really tired right now so I won't go on and on, but I agree that humans, all humans, from all creeds and religions, need to not be so egotistical. If we are shepards of the animals, then we should care for them, not murder them. I wish I could be a vegetarian, but hey, I like the taste of meat. However, when ever I am eating meat, I never, ever throw any meat away...ever. To eat meat is a natural thing for humans, we are omniverous. I think we eat too much meat though, but that's more of a rant on diet. Appreciate what the animal has done for you, maybe even meditate on it (i dont want to use the word pray). Meditate on it's sacrifice. Energy is exchanged and constantly moving, if you believe in the energy of the spirit, I believe it is fesable to entertain the idea of reincarnation. Sorry for spelling mistakes. I dunno...I have my own battles and ideas with christianity. It took a lot of happiness away from me and brought me much sorrow many many times throughout my life. I will loosely say I agree with the Bible being corrupt. Just like we do not sacrifice animals to a god to wash away our sins, or stone our brethren of different creed. I believe people, whatever sex they may be, should be able to live their lives..in love with eachother...Christians pick and choose what they want to follow in the bible...but don't all humans...we are hypocrital by nature...but ancient, obsoliete scrolls make everything all the more difficult for people to open their minds to change.

...

I think if our society is going to continue being an omnivorous one, that a standard educational practice would be useful: Take kids on field trips to a slaughterhouse when they are old enough to understand. Show them where meat comes from, how it all works... and let them decide for themselves.
I think our separation from those we kill is really unhealthy... People go to the grocery store and buy a package... they don't even stop to think a moment about the one who gave his or her life in order for that package to be there. We're distant, and we've forgotten how to respect life because of it...
I think our society would be a lot healthier if those who ate meat met and paid their respects to those who gave it...

And i also think if people who ate meat were exposed to our modern 'humane' methods of obtaining it, i would have a lot less to complain about.

I agree =) I've thought about going to a slaughterhouse sometime to just kinda, realize..you know? I don't know any around here though. Humm

This thread makes me want to go hug my animals.

its times like this i hate being the wrong species

I'm atheist so this gets two Omari thumbs up and a fav~ :o

Um..notto Dispute you but actually SUPPORT you. No matter what the religion, (I am catholic) I never believed ne being was any greater or less then another. (I actually LOVE stories where the animals enslavehumans) But being a master did not (and should not) ever mean better, being master means esxatly what has been taugh in many religions, A Master doesn't rule..he serves, hehas a responsibility to care for others, and seeto THEIR needs, so that they can see to his (hence the circle)

AS usual, I'm at a loss for words, since your ideas are what I agree with. I love these pieces from you, they're so heartfelt and full of emotion.

Questions: are you ever happy?

Do you go out of your way to enrage yourself, to justify your own cause?

just curious.

I'm happy a lot of the time in fact... more often than not. :D

And no, not really... There are periods of time when i 'vent' and periods of time when i don't, but it's something i always feel passionate about. Self-prodding not required...

Yeah cause i had that problem once, nearly drove me insane, but I guess working at Walmart wasn't helping me either =/

Dude... I love you for this resolution.
I feel exactly the same way about fanatism to a book.

I applaud your notion of burning churches ^_^
...we're all meat - just so happens we're the smartest pieces of meat with thumbs, so we won the evolutionary prerogative to do just about anything we want to (including eating any other animals) - and since we're collectively ignorant about the negative impact we have on everything around us, we're destined for extinction - maybe by then the dolphins will have evolved some thumbs.

I agree with you on many counts EcMajor!

The 3 faiths of Abraham, and their respective holy books, have done little for me in my life. I would much rather prefer a Taoist/Buddhist/Eastern perspective on spirituality and so forth.
(I believe something like 40% or more of India are practicing vegetarians btw? - With a sufficiently balanced diet of legumes/lentils, grains, and some dairy supplemented too, meat consumption is surely not 'integral' to a healthy lifestyle. In fact, its probably quite the opposite. Isn't colon cancer, and heart disease, directly linked to the consumptionm, or over consumptionof animal fats?)

Have you heard of the term Ahimsa?

I quote : "Ahimsa (Devanagari: अहिंसा; IAST ahiṃsā) is a Sanskrit term meaning nonviolence (literally: the avoidance of violence - himsa). It is an important tenet of the religions that originated in ancient India (Hinduism, Buddhism, and especially Jainism). Ahimsa is a rule of conduct that bars the killing or injuring of living beings. It is closely connected with the notion that all kinds of violence entail negative karmic consequences. The extent to which the principle of nonviolence can or should be applied to different life forms is controversial between various authorities, movements and currents within the three religions, and has been a matter of debate for thousands of years. "

As of late, I have been studying non-dualistic traditions, especially Advaita Vedanta, and the works of Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Maharaj, and Jiddu Krishanmurti. This stuff is very high philosophy. I have read alot of books my different Gurus and so forth, and these 3 give the most pure message in my opinion. Their message is not concerned with dogma and law. All three are only concerned with the nature of mind/consciousness/I, and the easing of suffering. If you have heard of any of these sages, my apologies, but if you haven't, you might appreciate some of the writings put forth by these men.

There are also some big differences, as I see it, between 'human', and 'animal'.

Firstly, human beings have the potential to manifest/create their reality. This makes us dramatically different than anything else on this planet Earth. To make thoughts, dreams, and visions solidify with our bare hands, and the energy of our minds. Human beings can create. What is God but a Creator? Animals (as far as my senses can detect) cannot do this sort of thing, as developed as we can anyways.

I DON'T agree however with the perspective that animals are any more pure than humans. The Animal kingdom, and the natural world...is filled with just as much chaos, destruction, violence, and disorder as the 'human' world.

In fact, I believe that our sense of COMPASSION, is also what seperates us from the Animal kingdom.

If you examine the drudgery of the food chain, an Animal will kill another, b/c of instinct. Genetics. He will not give a thought to their actions generally.

Human beings on the other hand, can give deep thought to such matters. We do not have to operate on auto-pilot if we are fully conscious and aware. Just because something is instinctual inside of us does not mean it is 'good'.

Now back to compassion. As I said, when an animal kills for food, it his genetics operating there. Humans on the other hand can ask themselves many many questions regarding morality, ethics, COMPASSION, spirituality, and so forth.

In no way am I saying that Animals are inferior, in fact, I really do believe that every single particle on this Earth, from the smallest to the largest, is all ONE Reality. But, I also believe, that Man himself is worthy of worship, and is probably one of the most advanced lifeforms that Planet Earth has spun so far.

Didn't Gandhi say, "you can tell how ethical a society is by the way they treat their animals"... or something to that effect...

Now, for a slightly different perspective... Though this might sound un-compassionate of me...and off-topic, but!

I am WAY more concerned right now with the amount of human! lives being ground up in Iraq, Darfur, and probably 300 other places in the world right now. We honestly have got WAY bigger problems in the world than worrying about who and who isn't eating animal flesh.

Meat is meat, and I for one am not about to give it up. There have been many measures, particularly in America to humanize the manner by which we slaughter our animals for food [to reduce suffering and needless pain].

We have omnivorous teeth which suggest a diet of flesh and flora; much like bears, and some canines. To be quite honest, due to our nutritional needs [meats has proteins that soy, beans, etc do not have and are vital to our health and growth], we would still be hunting, killing, slaughtering, etc animals for food regardless of religion and belief.

But speaking of religion and beliefs--I know very few people in my community and my church who thought animals were to be slaves and wasted. Many in my church were part of earth organizations, to conserve wilderness, protect certain endangered animals, etc, along with helping the poor, and giving to charity. There are many in the Christian group that feel animals cannot protect themselves from certain things, such as man and some environmental disasters [natural and man-made]. The bible states that animals were created first, and man second, and man was given the task of tending to the garden of eden and the creatures that inhabited it. ie, Man was charged with protecting earth environment and the many creatures that created the ecological community abound.

I would also like to remind us that among pack animals, such as wolves and lions, a kill is offered to the alpha or head of the pride. When in the Old Testament a lamb was sacrificed to God, one can see this is as little different than a kill being offering to the Alpha. We can even defy God and challenge his authority [just as many pack members do], but as of yet, God has not proven to be a weak alpha [Satan can concur if he wants]. And Alphas do punish //hard// those that do defy them. Some are put in exile. Some are killed. Some are merely put in their place. When in this perspective, when one hates God, one hates all that he has created, including animals, including humanity, including earth. According to the Bible, God is present in all the world; He is every where and everything, Alpha and Omega.



Now if you want to see a world that uses, abuses, and wastes animals, look to China, Japan, and those of greed and hate. Furriers in China strip animals of their flesh without even killing them first. The Animals are alive even after skinless. Here is a video link to prove it: http://youtube.com/watch?v=VFHeVbATIxE I'd like to mention that Christians are persecuted, tortured, etc in China, so you can assume these people are not Christians.

Shark-fin-soup is all I have to say for Japan.

Poachers that kill Rhinos for their horn [which is made of the same material as our own hair and nails], elephants for their tusks; Poachers that capture and imprison animals such as monkeys, birds, pandas, apes, wild cats and dogs, etc for the sake of pets and pleasure; and people in the drudges of society that fight roosters, pitt bulls; people who breed and breed and breed animals in waste and filth all for a sold pup or kit; people who abuse and neglect their pets; etc. All the aforementioned are cruel and evil, and you can talk to most people, christian or otherwise, that will agree. Those that don't should be the subject of your rant.


To blame Christianity for human sin is wrong, and bigoted, especially when one of its principles is to protect what we were blessed with. That pamphlet stated an opinion, and did state that it was a gift to be blessed with Animals in our life. We eat animals. Animals provide beloved company, and to some more than that--from healing and protection to other things. It isn't a sin to kill animals. It isn't a sin to kill man. MURDER was the sin. To kill in hate, for revenge, with malice, or for twisted pleasure is murder. Killing in self-defense isn't murder. Killing by accident isn't murder. Killing for need isn't murder, though what is needed could be debated.

Read my response to XianJaguar above, it's basically the same thing i'd say to you.

Like i said there, the sin is in humanity, and it's present in every culture. But, in my experience (i've only lived in one culture thus far, and it's a predominantly christian one.) anthropocentrism, the idea that the world is our dominion and everything on it was created to benefit us - is an idea that has proliferated with christianity, because it says it in the bible, and such.
The problem is not all christians, obviously, but only those who are ignorant. So... if you're not ignorant, then this message is not for you.
And even then if you're still offended, then sorry. Not much i can do about that...

On another thing you mentioned - i hear people often saying things like what you did:
"meats has proteins that soy, beans, etc do not have and are vital to our health and growth"
And i'm fairly certain that's a myth. I'd like for someone to prove that to me, or show me facts... But it seems to me that protein is protein.
Also, even if one did need animal protein, there's plenty of it in eggs and dairy.

I agree that we will still be killing for a long time yet, regardless of religion or anything else... but it's not because we have to, it's because it's easier.
I said earlier in a comment somewhere else that the argument "we should do something because it's natural" (such as eating meat because animals in nature eat meat, and our teeth are the teeth of omnivores) is pretty hypocritical.
What about our society, our industry, and our lifestyle IS natural? Unless you're living in the jungle, hunting and gathering, that justification doesn't hold much water.

"This idea really only has become prevalent with the spread of Christianity, and it's Man's biggest mistake... or Man's biggest Sin, if you prefer.
I hope i live to see the struggling remnants of this religion crumble to dust."

Pardon if that doesn't sound like someone merely angered by the ignorant Christians. It appears to me that your bigotry is showing yet again. "The problem is not all christians [sic], obviously, but only those who are ignorant." My response to that is as follows: replace Christians with humans and you might sound a little less severely bigoted.

A myth? My only mistake in that statement was I should have said Amino Acid rather than Protein.
"High biological value foods contain enough indispensable amino acids for an adult diet and are considered to be good quality protein. Meat, fish and eggs sit in this category.

Low biological value foods don't contain enough indispensable amino acids. Plant foods, such as pulses, nuts and seeds, are in this group."
--http://www.cudahychamber.com/NutritionBasicsMeatFishEggs.htm

--http://www.faqs.org/nutrition/Pre-Sma/Protein.html

Also--eggs and dairy come from the animal and we use it do we not? Dairy Cows are bred to live simply as milk factories, or if we want to go melodramatic, slaves. Yeh. We can always milk our women I guess. Gotta protect the rights of the animal. Not like we NEED to drink cow milk.

Chickens have egg laying cycles, when they would produce infertile eggs and when they would produce fertile eggs. Unless we know exactly when each hen is producing fertile eggs and non-fertile eggs, one can assume that on a regular basis we are eating the embryo of a living animal--a potential being. Killing the potential life of that embryo is //better// than killing a cow for its tenderloin?

Give a grain of imagination to any intelligent being, and one may assume that it is natural to develop community, economy, and lifestyles based around it. Ants build hills and Gorillas build societies. Humans build cities. Ants have soldiers and workers. Humans have employees. Ants can be destructive. Humans are destructive. I see little difference. The only--THE ONLY--difference between humans and animals is that we have a higher conscious that allows us the reasoning of right and wrong. And that puts us higher than animals. That reasoning that we are gifted with--by god or not--is why we are higher than animals and why we are granted the task of protecting them and our environment.

I will reiterate my last statement as it seems that you never seem to read it. Because we are capable of knowing right and wrong puts us on a higher level than animals. HOWEVER that does not mean that we should abuse those animals or abuse our planet. We share this world with them and we, unlike the animals, have the capability to adapt and reason around most everything the earth can throw at us. With our abilities, we are capable of protecting the animals and ourselves from disasters and preserving our world around us.

We are capable of this--animals aren't. When a forest fire erupts, animals can't fight it. They either die or run away. When floods happen, animals simply drown or get to safety. Humans can evacuate and save others. With this reasoning, one can assume that Humans are either higher evolved or simply above animals.

If you really want us to be natural, completely un-hypocritical, and green, we must never take a pill again, we must poop and pee outside, stop wearing clothes, eat only food that has died of natural causes [that chick that fell out of the tree and that apple that fell from the branch only], bathe in naturally occurring water sources [rivers, streams, lakes, ponds] or rather don't bathe at all but pick the bugs out of your uh skin, never use a condom, never use anything running on electricity unless it is a fire from struck wood, have a set sleep pattern, and sit on your butt all day unless you you absolutely must do something else [find water, a mate, food, shelter--which can only be naturally occurring or dug or built with naturally broken sticks].

Since humans don't have to do that, we again can assume that we are higher beings. Many animals were here on earth much longer than humans yet none can match a human intellect or reasoning outside of preprogrammed instinct.

You were saying that you hoped to see the collaps of religion. We'll, you may. We are in the age of Pisces, the age of the two fish. Jesus was born in the begining of this age. And since then, we have been in the Christian era. At about 2150 the age of Pisces will end, and a new religion will rise. You may see a religion that shares your views come from the ashes.

Let's just remember some people like me would die if we didn't eat red meat. pernicious anemia can only be managed that way.

That's probably the most informed post I've read on FA for a while, Jaele. Way to represent the God behind the animals.

By the way ecmajor, what was the name of the pamphlet you read and used in the pic?

Thanks ^^

I'll admit, though, that I had to resist adding several personal jibes--I am a huge animal lover (I can't even tell you how devastated I was when my Husky of 15+ yrs died and I had to bury him myself) and a Christian. To see this and have myself and so many others like me just shoved into one ignorant pile of hate was depressing and ultimately insulting.

I've had similar experiences. The most vivid was going to a Christian camp when I was a teen, and one day we went to a zoo. Our simplistic tour guide starts drawing Biblical parallels from animals and making cautionary tales based on them, and he does so with this voice like he's in a Christian B-movie. Of course, the unspoken 'Christian' animals were used to represent the light, and the 'non-Christian' animals were used to represent temptation or sin or whatever. There was one occasion where he took a young snake, held it up to his throat, stroked it, and said something along the lines of "You know kids, sin may look nice and entertaining at first, but the more you give it your attention and the more you harbor it inside, the greater chance that it's going to bite you some day!" As he ends his little sermon, he holds the snake in such a way that he makes it look like it's going to bite him. And all the while, the snake had this freaked-out look on its face. In retrospect, I guess they always have that sort of frozen expression, but you get my point.

It was from a publication called "AWAKE!" if i remember correctly. I don't remember the name of the issue, but it was something along the lines of "what's the right way to view pets?" or something like that.

*cringe*

dont hurt the cow!!!! >.<

um...your rant kind of confused me...i may just not be feeling at my smartest right now
what exactly are your stands on this?
cus....i think i agree but...-_-

Well, to sum it up, i don't think humanity has the right to claim the world and all other animals as their posessions, as something created by God to serve them. I think it's really arrogant and disrespectful.

I made this piece the way i did because The bible says that humankind is entitled to everything, that the world is his dominion... and this causes a lot of negative things to happen... because people can use it as justification for their actions.
I was pretty angry when i wrote the description, so it's a little exaggerated due to that (like the thing about burning churches)

Anyway, yeah... it really bothers me, that attitude. The world is not ours... it's a priviledge, not a right. We need to respect it, and especially those we share it with.

*nod nod*

this is so true...im vegetarian...and people have actually told me that in tbe bible it says that animals are ok to eat...i just tell them that i dont care what the bible says i still wont.

people think the earth can take whatever we can do to it...if they keep destroying it the way they do theyll see how wrong they are. -_- we are animals too...we bleed and hurt the same way they do...

might doesnt equal right.

Instead of a speach, I'll just put it simple...

I have never understood the purpose of sacraficing animals in ancient realigions. During the age of Taurus, the common symbol for a/many God(s) was the bull. Yet, at the same time, in various other religions as well as the ones that recognized the bull, they used bulls as well as many other animals as sacrafices. Not like the common practice of animal-human fighting for enertainment.

Odd world we live in, isn't it?

BTW, I just wanted to make sure that you know I have been agreeing with you ECMajor.

Humans are very bizarre creatures, that's for sure.

Your example is a lot like certain things that exist today. For example, around where i live, there are moose. Every year there's this 'Moose festival' which is kind of a big get-together, sort of like a faire, with tents and people selling moose-related merchandise... and they're all like "we love moose! honour the moose, one of this state's great treasures!"
...
And of course, since it's moose themed, and it honours the moose, they have stands set up with grills selling moose burgers.

Maybe i'm just clueless, but that seems kinda contradictory to me. Why doesn't it to everyone else? o.0 *scratches chin*

I think that cognitive dissonance thing has a lot to do with a lot of things. i need to do some deep research on that subject...

It certainly is an odd world!

It's all about making money in that case. Kinda sounds like its a fad for your community. Add moose to anything, and I'm sure they'd buy it. Even moose cancer! I'm not suprised that they would sell them as food too.

Kinda freeky!

I've eaten a lot of crazy stuff. Not at theme parks and such though. I like small-town, local types of food, not Disney. Nothing creepy like any pet-type animals, but stuff like snake, quail, and deer. You name it. However, I didn't eat it because it was a fad, I did it because it was all there was! I've spend days hiking with only what I could carry.

What's your thought on this circumstance of killing?

Yeah, fad may be right. The buffalo fad is dying down, so maybe moose is the next big thing?
There are lots of horrible things going on that i could point to here, but i'll stay on topic:

I don't think it's wrong to kill if you're surviving (it happens in nature all the time, to deny that would be a pretty big load of hypocrisy)
There are still some human cultures even, in remote and isolated areas who live with the land - they hunt, but they know limits, and they haven't forgotten respect. I don't think it's wrong for them to live the way they do - all in all it's probably a lot more commendable than our way.
(have you ever read Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn? If not, i recommend it... it's quite an interesting (and possibly lifechanging) bit of philosophy... and it's relevant to this.)

The reasons for hunting and surviving are the part where i debate.
With our populations as they are, earth cannot support us as a hunting society, because we'd wipe out everything.
Because of this, we have agriculture (and that's the only reason we have this to begin with... it goes both ways.)

And we have the technology and the ability now to live in a society that is based on a vegetarian diet - afterall, a huge percentage of what we grow and the land we use for agriculture is cultivated for animal feed. It's inefficient to grow all this food, then feed it to another animal for a period of time... until finally killing the animal for our own food. Why not skip the middleman? People don't believe it's possible, because that's what the profiting industry wants them to think...
We might just be able to support our current population, if everyone was educated, and our culture had an effective knowledge of vegetarian diet, and the corresponding agricultural needs. Though i do think it would do us and the world a lot of good to stop breeding, or at least learn restraint.
Education is pretty important, in all things. Maybe the most important thing... I say overpopulation is the root of our troubles... but the overpopulation is the result of ignorance. If people understood the consequences of reproducing, maybe they'd be more likely to use birth control. And if governments understood better the impact of populations, they'd dedicate more funding toward making birth control cheaper and more readily available. (because i know in a lot of places, like most of africa, there simply isn't birth control available.)

But, i know all that is a long way off, and i realize we're not ready for it.

I believe that if our society is going to choose to be what it is now, as separate from nature as we are, and most of all volunteering to be shepherds of the earth, we can do a lot better.

What i mean is, i don't think we can have it both ways... we have to either continue along like we are now, with cities, agriculture, and all the things we're familiar with - or regress and leave this behind in favour of the life of tribes and people connected to nature (like those few isolated cultures i mentioned before - the Leavers, as opposed to us the Takers ...to use Daniel Quinn's terms.)

I don't really see us choosing the latter... we're pretty well built into this support system now, and barring some major change in the world (like a catastrophe or collapse of civilization) i don't see humankind returning to its roots among the trees. Hell, lots of people living today can't even fathom living in the wild, it's alien to them.

I think if we're going to fulfill this role as shepherds of the earth (not because it was created for us, our rightful dominion... but simply because we're the ones who can.) we ought to be responsible, and compassionate. I know people disagree with me about a lot of this... but would you agree that true compassion would still include raising intelligent, thinking animals in prison cells, the sole purpose of their lives being a flesh harvest? Their feelings and minds nothing but an unfortunate waste-biproduct?
Ok, that is off topic though, you're not talking about big-industry and factory farming. I think in a truly compassionate society any killing would be unnecessary and frowned upon - it seems to me there's a very big relationship between killing non-humans, and killing humans. Even if someone sees a non-human as less worthy, killing them still causes emotional trauma, even if slight. Killing changes a person... regardless of what is being killed. The quote "As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields." is basically what i'm getting at. It's really hard to explain, though.

So why would we want to be a truly compassionate culture? I don't know... what is compassion for? This touches on things i can't explain at all, other than by saying that "compassion feels right, and good." And i am confident that people would agree compassion is right, and good. We may not be ready as a society to take it to the next level, but i think if we survive, we will eventually mature enough that the majority will feel this way. Afterall, we're a society who has separated itself from nature. I'm still not sure if that's good or bad or just neutral... but i don't think there's a question that it's true.

God, i've rambled so much.

As for your question, because i live in a technological culture where things are available to make such possible, i'm personally going to try and minimize the blood on my hands. However, i try my best not to try and force that on others... And i think if you live in a small community and your food is acquired from local people, your meat from someone you know, for instance... that is a lot better than the industrialization of slaughter. I personally still don't like it or feel it's necessary anymore, unless you're living way out there in the woods, but... it's a lot better than it could be. The closer you are to those you eat, the more likely it'll be that you'll have respect for them. I think that's the truth...

Yeah, sorry for the essay. Maybe it was good reading? I'm sure it's meandering and i know there are contradictions that i haven't explained, but that's why i continue to think about things.

An entire side of my family pretty much, are hunters. When i was younger i used to go camping with them, fishing, goose hunting, and such, so i do have a little bit of background in that area. I live in a rural area... i can't stomach cities. ...Just to put that in perspective.
They seemed to be respectful, not like sport hunters - and they always took the meat, that's why they did it, really. I've had plenty of venison in my time... Like i said though, it doesn't seem necessary unless you're doing it to survive - Is it tradition? Is it an escape? I just have to put the question forth - is taking life worth upholding the tradition, does it make the escape of a trip into the woods worthwhile?

I don't know how easy it is to not eat meat when you're alone in the woods on a long trip, without a huge pile of supplies... it's probably pretty difficult. Hmmm, i guess every person undertaking a trip like that, or an escape into the wilderness, just has to ask that question of themselves: Is this worth taking a life for? ...I don't expect everyone, or even very many people at all, to say no. ...and i have to learn to live with that for now. *shrugs*

heh, sorry again for the long-ass comment.

Actually, I enjoyed the essay very much. You're obviouslly very passionate of the subject matter. I belive that passion contributes to the best of essays. And your obviously not basing this on any obscure bias that you picked up in school. That is what truley impresses me!

I'll be honest, I do enjoy the taste of meat, but not passionately. And I do not just simply disreguard the sacrafice of the animal that has served to feed myself, and many others. You're right, the way in which the animal is killed does take from the flavor. This is very similare to the blood diamonds in Africa. Just look up Conflict free diamonds, you'll see.

When the Native Americans (which I believe are actually migrated Chinese...food for thought... ;)) killed a buffalo, they used every single part of the animal for food, shelter, ...etc. I belive that is the best way to go.

I have to say that I personally believe that our nation is not overpopulated. China and India on the other hand, yes. But there are cows who seek refuge there. Because of this, the meat industry has become a nescesity for humanities survival.

By the sounds of it, we both have relative views on the value on humanities value. This is greatly tied into our views on overpopulation.


I have always lived in Citys. Miami, Manhattan, West Palm...etc. I have been all over the world. France, Germany, Italy, Sitzerlan,...etc. And I have noticed that there are always people there. Each with their own lives, languages, and loved ones. In this day and age, it has become hard to find a place isolated and in solace. That is why I often leave these places to have time to myself ad nature. Don't take me to be a hippie, oh no. If anything I am a Corporate Jockey! (lol) But it is that primal fealing that you get when there is no one to be found, no traffic, no lighting. Just the sound of crickets and the wind in the trees. You see this is my passionate field. With this temporary primal existance, I must be ready to run into trouble. Snakes, bears, boars, deer. All of which are capable of agression. There is a difference at this point between seeking to kill, and bieng ready to defend.

However, when you need food, you must do what you need to do. Granted, you are right that the current population could not be sustained by the wildlife now, but how many people do you know who do this kind of thing? lol I think the clearest when in and amongst the most beautiful and untouched of wilderness.

If you see a snake on a road heavily traversed, do you leave it, move it, or kill it? It all boils down to personal ethics. And even then, who has 'unique' ethics. We have all been studied philosophically. I myself have studied stoicisim. (Marcus Aurelius, I highly recomend it) So, in short, I don't feel terable for taking a life that I end with the intent of making the greatest use of respectfully.

Lastly, reverting to the text on mass consumption and overpopulation. I belive that you are right. Humanity can suffice with more green in its diet. God knows that so many of us need it. However, at the same time I belive that (in modest amounts) it is a nessecary evil in human existance.

You seem very intelectual. If we were to someday meet in person, I bet our conversations would be very enjoyable. For now, the emotionless corespondance will have to suffice.

Also... sorry for the speach. I usually try to keep things short, as I tend to stray in topics.

the land we use for agriculture is cultivated for animal feed. It's inefficient to grow all this food, then feed it to another animal for a period of time...

Unfortunately for you, it is IMPOSSIBLE to support the entire world on a vegan diet. To suggest we could shows a huge disrespect to the diversity of this planets cultures. A great deal of the land we use to grow crops to feed animals is NOT suitable to grow anything OTHER than animal feed. It is not high quality enough land to grow human grade crops. Therefore, the idea that we use the land we grow animal feed on to grow human feed and just ditch the animals wouldn't work.
There is not enough arable land for this planet to grow enough crops to support an entirely vegan population.

And lets assume for a second that we DID stop eating animals, and only ate things we'd grown. What about the next drought? Flood? Other natural disaster? Boom, all the country's food supply wiped out in one. Crops are simply not reliable/hardy enough to be the only food source we allow ourselves.

Its one thing that always bugs me, when people bring up the opinion about the land and how everyone could plausibly be vegan. Its just not true. The world is a HUGE place, with huge diversity among people. Some people can't even afford to eat ANYTHING right now, let alone restricting them further by stating they have to only eat vegetarian/vegan foods.

Beautiful in such a sad way, I wish I could make the people in my home town understand these points.

heh

religion

and for the record AMEN

If animals are that intelligent, why don't cats I kick in the face fight back? Why haven't cows staged and uprising before they're made into delicious beef jerky?

For every animal you don't eat, I shall eat three. I'm not only neutralizing your self-righteous crusade, I'm making it so that you're hurting animals. Also, I'll make sure to take in the next stray cat I see and boil it alive.

I have to agree with this guy. Your bullshit rant is hypocritical. Ten dollars says the creator of this topic isn't even a vegetarian, or knows people who aren't. Not going to be doing your part and taking their lives away to save another animal or anything now are you? Welcome to earth. Considerable population of cows, pigs, deer, and turkey to go around. Also, hahahahaha @ people who actually SHAVE an animal and wear their fur as a coat. You don't see animals doing that to us, now do you?

Man up.

WTF? I didn't post that... Well guess what idiots I'm changing my password so don't even try it. You can get your lists from ED but you can't do much else.

Even if animals are lesser it doesn't mean you should be the top dog and try to hurt them. Being the top also means you have more complex emotions and knwoing right or wrong. They feel pain. They can die.

PS: password's changed pricks. Piss off and leave me alone.

You're a fucking idiot. Animals ARE here to serve man, animals are alot less intelligent. -alot less-

Humans rule for a reason, remember that. Stop whining like a little bitch and accept the reality that mankind rules the animals, doesn't need to be written into a book, fool. It's reality. Stop crying.

Shouldn't being the dominant species on the planet mean we should be responsible?

Maybe you'll understand a little better when you've grown up some.

That's amusing coming from the person basically whining over how the human species IS the dominant one. You tell me to grow up when I'm sitting here showing reality down your throat. I don't know, psycho. I think you've got it all wrong here. Calm down, I don't want you reverting to your horse/goat/dog form and ripping me in half or anything.

You need to grow up if you think the world works like a Disney movie. Evolution wins here, tool.

reminds me of the moon.. how ppl are selling pieces of the moon.. Who owns the moon? where does the money goes to?
ppl like to claim everything for their own

Animals are not intelligent. They are lesser creatures. This is why mankind is able to comprehend further concepts and invented weapons to slay animals. If animals were able to fight back, they would. As mankind is able to create weapons and has the knowledge to outwit and destroy the other species for food, it does so. It is the dominant species. Nothing's going to top us, other than aliens. I don't see that happening.

Mankind has god-like control. We can make other species extinct. We can make other species survive. Evolution wins here.

Tell that to the HIV virus.

Yeah, I'm getting rather sick of this "animals are here to serve man" bullshit. Fuck that. Animals are here, in my opinion, to teach US how to better OURSELVES. Hell, my cat has mastered certain qualities that I've yet to even come close to mastering, like unconditional love, patience, pure empathy, acceptance, and tolerance. I can't freakin' do any of those things and my cat's like "Hey, be like me. This is how ya do it." Animals are nothing short of amazing. In my beliefs, animals are much closer to the God-Force than humans.

I'd really like to see Christianity lose that bit out of the Bible. I don't want to see the religion crumble, because there are people who feel happy on that path, however, I wish as a religion, it'd lose its arrogance and "We're right. You're not. We win. You lose." attitude that I see.

Props to you for making this!!! :) Fantastic job and it's nice to see some art in the fandom with an actual message.

i bet if we put all humans without houses/protection/weapons, purely in the wild like all animals, we'd be a rare race!!

I love this. I hate it when they "put down" horses for accidentally rolling over and killing someone.

Ugh! Where did they do that!?

That's sort of like a few centuries ago, if they discovered you were having sex with a horse, they'd punish you of course, with death... and then they'd burn the horse too, because he or she was 'dirtied' by the sin.

I don't know if it's generally done, but I'm sure I've heard it happen on the news. They'll put down a dog if it bites someone, but I think that's justified because the dog is liable to injure more people, and not due to some mindless revenge due to an accident.

Yeah, they had weird notions that animals became dirtied... as if the victim is as guilty as the criminal. The bible says that if a man rapes a woman, the woman must be wed to the man because he... disgraced her or something.

Humans can be such silly creatures. :-/

in some african tribes they stone the woman (put her in the ground upt o her head and then throw rocks at her til she dies) if she cheats with another man. difference is, the man wuld have to do the same too, but he has to be seen by 7 different persons, the woman only by 1..

Shouldn't it be a black man doing that? If you want to see sick disgusting acts of animal abuse, try looking up some of the sick shit african tribes do to bulvine. *meanwhile liberal supports jerk off to spiritualistic BS, allowing their undoing with voodoo and this crazy shit lol*

They actually do have so called religeous instruments that they cut caves with, rusty blades with little or no edge. They either do a slow, drawn out process of cutting the entire head off, not just slitting the throat. However if they do get tired and give up they do end at the throat.

Then after they sling the animal around in the air spilling as much blood as possible. it has to do with their religeon I shit you not. Did I mention the animal is still alive or twitching?

Using the catholic church as a scape goat, lol LOL! Alright, if your going to voice an opinion, try something fresh and new. Something that goes for the majority. Like maybe " cattle farmers" *Not that you could*. My grandfather owns a cattle ranch, they treat them pretty well and the cattle pretty much are a part of the family or " neighborhood ", or what ever. They give them names and they do stupid stuff or make you smile. much like any animal would, but when it comes time to end of days it isn't " ZOMBG WE SLIT YOUR THROATS THEONE1!1!!!1!!!". I think its usually done with a hammer, at such a speed its instantaneous. or atleast I believe, isn't that where the nomadic hammer saying comes from? oh well, I don't know.

The point was to choose something that would go for everyone. bonking the catholic church is old. if you don't like them, then avoid them, stop your crying bitching BS, Thats what gets you on ED and shit.

what I do know is this, We've done no worse to animals, than what we've done to our own kind. Bam, end of story.

jews too. they slit the troath of a bull or cow. if its done wrong, even a little, they gotta overdo it

Had neighbors who were going to have a ceremonial Rooster killing in their back yard.

The rooster got loose and the neighborhood kids chased it all over the fuckin place.

three weeks later it was on the public channel for adoption. Epic.

thats sad!!!

We could be friends you know.

Let's, then. :)

This isn't your first submission that separates an intelligent zoophile from a common bestialist.

I am a satanist. Or pagan. I hate a christianity for this. I am always upset, when a moron as true good christian saying animals are stoopid craps for eating, and killing, but humans are choosen .I really hate church and all fucking belief.
And if they accept the evolution, they thinks the human has a inteligent desing, so the evolution was controlled by god....no way.
If you like animals dont believe of that fucking god, and dont believe of the jesus because he was nobody for me, also for you !
I fucking hate christian's stupid view ower the world....They are blind. A true human moronism.
My english is noobish, sorry. :C

Mmm-mmm-MMM! This is one tasty burger! Thank god for Wendys.

Oh I'm sorry, you were trying to make a point? Well, by all means, please continue. =P

I an't even going to touch this.

you're pretty dumb

oops, meant to say that to EL-ZomBo but w/e

Dude... I love ya for this. :)

So very true and so well said.

I agree completely with you ECMajor, and I respect that you have the guts to express yourself in defiance of what seems to be the majority.

Religion sucks. People use it to justify their actions and hatreds constantly, interpret and change it to further their agendas, and live in a life of dilution.
The sooner we ditch that crutch as a whole, the sooner we can resume evolution for the human race.

And BTW, humans are NOT superior. Oh how it pisses me off when people tell me otherwise... If you like thinking yourself superior, then why don't you lock yourself naked in a cage with a wild animal of equal size and start a fight. Be sure to webcast it.
Oh, but we're smarter! Yeah? Anyone actually grasp how screwed our environment is by our own doing? And we're still doing it!! Not to mention the fact that we have enough firepower to kill nearly everything on this planet over and over again. Real fucking smart. Either way, I'm not convinced that a high IQ makes us better in any way.

Maybe if we could start showing a little maturity and respect toward nature........toward life, I'd be a little more tolerant toward such conceded claims.

agreed. fully!

Killing to eat is one thing -- however the amount of meat consumed by people is kind crazy, and at this point, quite excessive. The biggest problem I have with the "animals belong to people and people can do what they will" thing is that I've come to believe in reincarnation and that animals have souls....humans arent "superior". We may think we are, but honestly, that in it self is arrogant. How can we attempt to impose our own morals on other animals, when human morals themselves often differ greatly between different cultures. Humans ARE animals, but I guess people just dont want to think that.

I eat meat (less than I used to), and I want to try to cut down a bit more as time passes, but i won't share that sense of entitlement some people have. Gah..its disgusting.

Behind you 100%

yes absolutely ive dispised christianity for all the wrongs it has your right on a billion differnt levels and we can barely say anything because the sickness known as christianity stops us its disgusting

heh, i like what i read on the artist comment
was a bit hard for me to stare at the drawing while analyzing the texts
i like what u have done >.<
i know its a 4 years old thing but heh xD it as good to read this ^^

While I don't agree with all your sentiments regarding religion/Christianity, I do agree it is supremely arrogant for anyone to suggest that animals are primarily put here by God for mankind to use. Worse, in my experience such sentiments go hand in hand with the heresy of creationism (pet peeve of mine).

Humans are ultimately animals; we are a part of Creation, not above it. To suggest otherwise is hubris.