18 02 2007

(Sorry for the lack of post…Just been busy with Uni.)

The drift of modern society proves the point. We are witnessing the abandonment of moral standard and the loss of humanity’s sense of destiny. Rampant crime, drug abuse, sexual perversion, rising suicide rates, and the abortion epidemic are all symptoms that human life is being systematically devalued and that an utter sense of futility is sweeping over society. these trends are directly traceable to ascent of evolutionary theory.

And why not? If evolution is true, humans are just one of many species that evolved from common ancestors. we’re no better than animals, and we ought not to think that we are. If we evolved from sheer matter, why should we should we esteem what is spiritual? In fact, if everything evolved from matter, nothing “spiritual” is real. We ourselves are ultimately no better than or different from any other living species. We are nothing more than protoplasm waiting to become manure. As a matter of fact, that is precisely the rationale behind the modern animal-rights movement, a movement whose raison d’être is the utter degradation of human race. Naturally, all radical animal-rights advocates are evolutionists. Their belief system is an inevitable byproduct of evolutionary theory. People for the Ethical treatment of Animals (PETA) is well known for its stance that animal rights are equal to (or more important than) human rights. They maintain that killing any animal for food is the moral equivalence of murder; eating meat is virtually cannibalism; and man is a tyrant species, detrimental to his environment. PETA opposes the keeping of pets and “Companion animals” — INCLUDING guide dogs for the blind. A 1988 statement distributed by the organisation includes this: “As John Bryant has written in his book Fettered Kingdoms, (companion animals) are like slave, even if well-kept slaves.”

Ingrid Newkirk, PETA’s controversial founder, says, “There is no rational basis for saying that human being has special rights…A rat is a pig is a dog is boy” Newkirk told a Washington post reporter that the atrocities of Nazi Germany pale by comparison to the killing animals for food: “Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouse.”

Clearly, Ms Newkirk is more outraged by the killing of chickens for food than she is by the wholesale slaughter of human beings. One gets the impression she would not necessarily consider the extinction of humanity an undesirable thing. In fact, she and other animal-rights advocates often sound downright misanthropic. She told a reporter, “I don’t have any reverence for life, only for entities themselves. I would rather see a blank space where I am. This will sound like fruitcake stuff again but at least I wouldn’t be harming anything.” The summer issue of Wild Earth magazine, a journal promoting radical environmentalism, included a manifesto for the extinction of the human race, written under the pseudonym “Les u. knight.” The article said, “if you haven’t given voluntary human extinction much thought before, the idea of a world with no people in it may seem strange. But, if you give it a chance, I think you must agree that the extinction of Homo sapiens would mean survival for millions, if not billions, of Earth-dwelling species…Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on earth, social and environmental.”

That is worse than merely insane, irrational, immoral, or humiliating; it is deadly.

But there’s even an organization called the Church of Euthanasia. Their web page advocates suicide, abortion, cannibalism, and sodomy as the main way to decrease the human population. Although the web page contains elements of parody deliberately designed for shock value, the people behind it are deadly serious in the opposition to the continuance of the human race. They include detailed instructions for committing suicide. The one commandment church members are required to obey is “thou shall not procreate.” By deliberately making their views sound outrageous as possible, they have received widespread coverage on talk-shows and tabloid-style news programs. They take advantage of such publicity to recruit members for their cause. Despite their shocking message, they have evidently been able to persuade numerous people that the one species on earth that ought to be made extinct is humanity. Their web site boasts that people in the thousands have paid the ten dollar membership fee to become church members.

That sort of lunacy is rooted in the belief that humanity is simply the product of evolution – a mere animal with no purpose, no destiny, and no likeness to the Creator. After all, if we got where we are by a natural evolutionary process, there can be no validity whatsoever to the notion that our race bears the image of God. We ultimately have no more dignity than an amoeba. And we certainly have no mandate from the Almighty to subdue the rest of creation. And if a human being is nothing more than an animal in the process of evolving, who can argue against the animal-rights movement? Even the most radical animal-rights position is justified in a naturalistic and evolutionary world-view. If we really evolved from animal, we are just animals ourselves. And if evolution is correct, it is sheer accident that man evolved a superior intellect. If random mutations had occurred differently, apes might be running the planet and humans would be in zoo. What right do we have to exercise dominion over other species that have not yet had the opportunity to evolve to a more advanced state?

Indeed, if man is merely a product of natural evolutionary process, then he is ultimately nothing more the accidental byproduct of thousands of haphazard genetic mutations. He is just one animal that evolved from amoeba, and he is probably not even the highest life-form that will eventually evolve. So what is special about him? Where is his meaning? Where is his dignity? Where is his value? What is his purpose? Obviously he has none.

It is only a matter of time before a society steeped in a naturalistic belief fully embraces such thinking and casts off all moral and spiritual restraint. In fact, that process has begun already. If you doubt that, consider some of the televised debauchery aimed at the youth.




2 responses

5 03 2007

I’m sorry, but this article is fallacious. What is your thesis anyway? Is it that because of evolution there is no god? Or that evolution must be wrong if there is GOD? Your argument that man has no ‘dignity if evolved’ is incomplete, and the link to PETA and the ‘Church of Euthanasia’ although possibly correct fails to acknowledge that these groups are extremist and do not speak for the whole of society.
You state they are ‘deliberately making their views outrageous as possible… received widespread coverage on talk-shows and tabloid-style news programs’ and that there has been ‘thousands who have paid the $10 fee’, which tells me more about the motivation of the groups rather than the philosophical values that they promote. The use of shock messages to profit is widespread throughout modern society, and throughout societies history, even pre evolution. Even looking at the spectrum of modern Australian society, shock messages are used to gain attention in all religions, science, music, media and politics. If we are to follow your reasoning that the evolution theory is the cause of the moral decline you speak of, then characters such as eminem, 50cent and even Paris Hilton are the result of Charles Darwin. In making this statement you are dening that there has been ‘moral wanderings’ before the publication of the evolution theory in 1859, which is ignoring 5 thousand years of European and Semitic history. If the root of the number of current social problems is the evolution theory then there would have been a much larger outcry in the time of publication, but the accuracy of its explanation is its redeeming factor, the more we discover about anthropology the more reasonable evolution is. Enlightenment doesn’t breed immorality.
Anyway you fail to understand the concept. Charles Darwin was a scientist pure and simple. His theory is based on physical evidence. Can’t the concepts that God created us in his image and the theory of evolution be complementary? It says in genesis that God created us in his image (genesis 1:26), but my bible never suggests that God didn’t create us the same way that he created the ‘birds, fish and all animals large and small.’ Isn’t the idea that God created one cell, in one pond in one little valley which could develop into the hundreds of different species, both plants and animals, more fascinating, more amazing than the mere creation of the animals themselves? Isn’t the creation of this one cell with its mechanics which allowed it to develop into these amazing creatures, of too amazing mechanical ability incredible? The genius of this creation IS OTHERWORLDLY. The first chapter of Genesis tells us that God made us in his image, not perfect but in his image non the less. It tells us that God gives us power over all animals, infact our purpose initially is to protect them. In this way we are the final design. We are the ultimate in evolution, as demonstrated by the presence of Jesus in human form. We are what God wanted to create, and the thought that we all have the same origin (God) is common with both the biblical and evolution sides. If you want some interesting reading look up the second book of ESDRAS and read the seven visions (dw, its all new testament). But its getting late and I have a long day tomorrow, so I shall do more reading and continue this 600 word comment tomorrow.

cheers for your opinions

26 07 2012

Seo directory

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: