http://ncrcafe.org/node/933
This is, oddly enough, an article from the National Catholic Reader. Sorry for all of the PETA stuff lately. . .
Anyway, it seems that a monastery was found to be running a factory farm style egg factory and PETA addressed the situation from a theistic perspective. I found this angle to be especially interesting...it's one I've never heard argued. Yet it seems that it could be a persuasive argument for many Americans, considering how increasingly devout the nation seems to be becoming.
Perhaps the more extremist Christians (the born-agains, fundamentalists, evangelicals) might disregard a plea for animal rights (or at least less cruelty) considering the earth is a temporal place. In waiting for the Rapture or the final judgement, animals are second-class citizens, not to be sublimely transported to heaven during the final days. Therefore, their lives pre-apocalypse, is not morally considered.
But for most other Christians, it seems that the words of the Bible are convincing enough. Being the Word of God, people may be/are compelled to live each passage as closely as possible, even the parts that contradict each other.
Therefore, an excerpts like Lev. 27:26, "26: "But a firstling of animals, which as a firstling belongs to the LORD, no man may dedicate; whether ox or sheep, it is the LORD's," might make a believer feel obligated to treat an animal with respect and consideration, as a work of God's.
This isn't to say that the Theistic argument would create holy vegetarians. . .Ezekiel 29:5 "And I will cast you forth into the wilderness, you and all the fish of your streams; you shall fall upon the open field, and not be gathered and buried. To the beasts of the earth and to the birds of the air, I have given you as food."
But if religious people read their tomes with a more sympathetic eye (mind, heart), then perhaps they would be able to approach animal suffering as important and the creatures themselves as God's creations, to be considered with a certain degree of reverence.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
You write:
"Anyway, it seems that a monastery was found to be running a factory farm style egg factory and PETA addressed the situation from a theistic perspective. I found this angle to be especially interesting...it's one I've never heard argued."
Check out our text, ch. 35-39; also, Regan has edited a collection of philosophical essays on the intersection of AR and religion.
"Yet it seems that it could be a persuasive argument for many Americans, considering how increasingly devout the nation seems to be becoming.
Perhaps the more extremist Christians (the born-agains, fundamentalists, evangelicals) might disregard a plea for animal rights (or at least less cruelty) considering the earth is a temporal place. In waiting for the Rapture or the final judgement, animals are second-class citizens, not to be sublimely transported to heaven during the final days. Therefore, their lives pre-apocalypse, is not morally considered."
I see no reason to recognize such thoughts as even coherent.
"But for most other Christians, it seems that the words of the Bible are convincing enough. Being the Word of God, people may be/are compelled to live each passage as closely as possible, even the parts that contradict each other.
Therefore, an excerpts like Lev. 27:26, "26: "But a firstling of animals, which as a firstling belongs to the LORD, no man may dedicate; whether ox or sheep, it is the LORD's," might make a believer feel obligated to treat an animal with respect and consideration, as a work of God's.
This isn't to say that the Theistic argument would create holy vegetarians. . .Ezekiel 29:5 "And I will cast you forth into the wilderness, you and all the fish of your streams; you shall fall upon the open field, and not be gathered and buried. To the beasts of the earth and to the birds of the air, I have given you as food."
Such texts are famously open to any number of contradictory interpretations. They are often a mirror for our preconceptions; not a source of insight.
"But if religious people read their tomes with a more sympathetic eye (mind, heart), then perhaps they would be able to approach animal suffering as important and the creatures themselves as God's creations, to be considered with a certain degree of reverence."
That is Regan's view.
dkj
Post a Comment