# Animals killing people



## TimV (Feb 27, 2010)

> An even larger crowd of more than 2,000 packed the stadium for a similar event at SeaWorld Orlando, home base of Dawn Brancheau, 40, who died Wednesday after the 12,000-pound Tilikum dragged her into the pool and battered her.



Tilikum has been involved in the deaths of two people, and he's still part of the act.

SeaWorld reinstates killer whale shows - SignOnSanDiego.com



> Exodus 21:28 "If a bull gores a man or a woman to death, the bull must be stoned to death, and its meat must not be eaten. But the owner of the bull will not be held responsible. 29 If, however, the bull has had the habit of goring and the owner has been warned but has not kept it penned up and it kills a man or woman, the bull must be stoned and the owner also must be put to death.



It's not exactly rocket science. An animal that kills a man has to be put down. It's been changing since I was a kid. In those days a dog that mauled a child was put down. Now a dog can rip a person apart and it's given to a good home???

What about genetics? You can breed gentleness and meanness into anything, even insects like bees. To anyone with a brain it makes sense to put down an animal that tries to kill a human. You take the genes out of the pool.

And they're keeping this Orca as a stud. Go figure.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Feb 27, 2010)

When man is nothing more than a distant cousin to every other animal on an evolutionary scale, this is completely reasonable.


----------



## kvanlaan (Feb 27, 2010)

Yep. Lower human three notches, raise large mammalian fish three notches, now they're only a couple notches away from each other in terms of equality. You can't kill the poor whale who was frightened by the human, threatening her already artificial habitat. You know that somewhere in the US tonight, some PETA/ALF supporter has made the comment: "I wish the orcas would kill *all* the trainers at SeaWorld, and then maybe they'd shut it down for good!"


----------



## Montanablue (Feb 27, 2010)

kvanlaan said:


> Yep. Lower human three notches, raise large mammalian fish three notches, now they're only a couple notches away from each other in terms of equality. You can't kill the poor whale who was frightened by the human, threatening her already artificial habitat. You know that somewhere in the US tonight, some PETA/ALF supporter has made the comment: "I wish the orcas would kill *all* the trainers at SeaWorld, and then maybe they'd shut it down for good!"


 
First of all, I agree that an animal that kills a human should be put down. And I feel horrible that this woman has died. 

HOWEVER, wild animals are not pets. If you play with a wild animal, you should be prepared to be mauled or killed. I'm certainly all for preserving human life. If we have an animal (usually a mountain lion) here who is coming into town or onto ranches and threatening people, then we go after it and we shoot it. But we don't go out looking for them! If you do that, you are being very foolish. Wild animals kill things and they are no respecter of persons. They are not Bambi and Thumper.


----------



## Jon Peters (Feb 27, 2010)

I don't agree that the whale should be put down. Humans that are put in dangerous situations with wild animals should not blame the animal when something like this occurs. The fault lies with all the HUMANS involved, not the big, stupid fish. 

Tim, your argument from Exodus 21 assumes a certain theological position. If we follow Ex. 21, I guess the whale should be stoned to death.


----------



## LawrenceU (Feb 27, 2010)

More people need to live on farms, or at lease be familiar with animal husbandry. Some of this foolishness would stop. This animal did not accidentally kill the 'trainer'. This has happened more than once by the same whale. If a bull or a stallion kills a man in a once, it may not be necessarily need to be put down depending upon the circumstance. Twice, shoot it.


----------



## py3ak (Feb 27, 2010)

Sometimes animals in captivity are pretty badly mistreated - audience members dropping cigarette butts into their mouths, that kind of thing. I'm not saying that was the situation here, or even that it means the animal shouldn't be put down, but it does definitely place a degree of blame on the humans who were jerks to begin with.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 27, 2010)

py3ak said:


> Sometimes animals in captivity are pretty badly mistreated - audience members dropping cigarette butts into their mouths, that kind of thing. I'm not saying that was the situation here, or even that it means the animal shouldn't be put down, but it does definitely place a degree of blame on the humans who were jerks to begin with.


 
Good point. And it must be understood that this is a gigantic killer whale, a species that can swim up to 100 miles in a day in the wild. Putting a pack animal that swims miles a day into a small tank is not exactly a recipe for success if you want the animal to be well-mannered. That said, I think a SeaWorld trainer sounds like a fulfilling job and I am sorry that this woman lost her life in it. I don't think it should mean that people should never train whales, and I'm sure this woman would agree - she dedicated her life to swimming with magnificent animals, and most of them were trained well enough to swim with people.


----------



## Spinningplates2 (Feb 27, 2010)

I agree with Tim V completely and because of the Image of God in humans the whale should die. People should be able to use animals in shows without mistreating them and for the most part they do. But a animal be used by men can't kill a human, period. We have to be careful when we start jusgeing how animals can be used without considering it abuse. I am sure that people think that using an Ox to plow is wrong and degrading to the Ox.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 27, 2010)

Spinningplates2 said:


> I agree with Tim V completely and because of the Image of God in humans the whale should die. People should be able to use animals in shows without mistreating them and for the most part they do. But a animal be used by men can't kill a human, period. We have to be careful when we start jusgeing how animals can be used without considering it abuse. I am sure that people think that using an Ox to plow is wrong and degrading to the Ox.


 
The existence of PETA types does not negate the reality that there are actions that are unwise and dangerous when training an animal. Orcas are designed to live in huge bodies of water and swim great distances in packs, hunting seals and dolphins. They don't live in human territory. The point is, if one animal is a fluke and kills somebody, by all means kill it. But if the animal is being intentionally put into a very unnatural state by humans, it may be that at some point we need to question why we are putting it in a place where it is very tempted to kill people. That said, I do not think that SeaWorld is a poor home for whales. I simply think there is room to consider how the conditions of the whales can be improved in such a way that may reduce their risk towards humans.

Let me put it this way: If a domesticated household dog mauls a child, you blame the dog. If a circus trainer jumps into a cage with a lion and eggs it on, and he ends up getting mauled...you don't so much blame the lion. Please don't misunderstand me. Those are extreme examples, and I don't think this SeaWorld trainer was asking to be killed. I simply think it is reasonable to ask what role the animal's conditions may have in the safety of humans interacting with large, dangerous animals.


----------



## smhbbag (Feb 28, 2010)

I am no animal expert, and I don't know what sort of security precautions were taken. But it sure seems that these folks have been under-prepared for events like this for a long while.

I saw a youtube clip of a killer whale at SeaWorld that chomped on a girl's leg and would not let go. After a couple hundred stitches, she was physically alright. But the video was quite disturbing, and that is why I am not posting it here.

In that case, the most astounding thing was that the struggle with the whale lasted for minutes. The trainers and staff on hand were reduced to tactics that appeared to be nothing more than kindly asking the thing to let go.

There were no harpoons, no spears, no guns....nothing. If there were some around, they were not used. Again, I am no expert, but I don't know how that is excusable. I don't even know if they would use them if they were available.

Maybe I'm thinking too much like a young guy who has watched too many movies....but it seems that in this day and age, we ought to be able to be able to end an attack by any kind of animal pretty much instantly, especially in such a controlled environment. In the water, that's a tougher task, but still seems quite doable if the will is there. 

If there is no other way, just get the thing to swallow a small explosive charge before each performance, and be ready to detonate it remotely if it starts acting crazy 

But this is no laughing matter, and I appreciate a lot of the previous posts. Bad things happen when you lower Man and lift up animals. Trouble is also part of the territory when dealing with the wild, fearful beasts God has created.


----------



## kvanlaan (Feb 28, 2010)

> HOWEVER, wild animals are not pets. If you play with a wild animal, you should be prepared to be mauled or killed. I'm certainly all for preserving human life. If we have an animal (usually a mountain lion) here who is coming into town or onto ranches and threatening people, then we go after it and we shoot it. But we don't go out looking for them! If you do that, you are being very foolish. Wild animals kill things and they are no respecter of persons. They are not Bambi and Thumper.



Believe me, I am not saying that the whole SeaWorld concept is a wise one, (putting me in a phone booth-sized enclosure and making me perform for pieces of bacon would tick me off after a while, I'm sure I'd go nuts and have at my 'trainers' eventually) but while I am sympathetic to this situation, I don't know why Shamu should be any different than a pit bull terrier. Put it down.

But the attitude that the whale is somehow justified in doing what it did is the weird part to me.

http://glossynews.com/society/human-interest/201002270430/peta-wants-tilikum-the-killer-whale-tried-as-a-dolphin/


----------



## LawrenceU (Feb 28, 2010)

Isn't it amazing how deeply Darwinistic thought has infiltrated the worldview of so many. Even those who would eschew Darwinism fall prey to its fruits. Barring some accidental killing of a man, goring would imply intent in the Scriptural illustration, an animal that kills a man should be dispatched. And, an animal that accidentally kills a man twice should as well. Cetaceans are intelligent creatures, for animals. But they are animals. This orca, killer whale, did not accidentally kills that trainer. It knew exactly what it was doing. It is one of the same techniques that is used on seals, a prey animal. Beware of what 'animal expert' you listen to about that behaviour. Those infected with animal rights tendencies will excuse it, not admit that it was a normal behaviour, and somehow blame humans; just like they have each time before. 

Kevin, the link you posted would be hilarious if it weren't so sad and infuriating. Yes, I realise it is satire. The problem is I know people who think like that.


----------



## JennyG (Feb 28, 2010)

I think I'm right in saying that in Britain any dog that mauls a 
human being will still be put down without question, which is exactly how it should be. We also have zealous animal rights campaigners though, so it may be only a question of time before this is considered shockingly inhumane.
I can't help suspecting that in the case of the whale, there may be another factor contributing to Sea world's reluctance to kill it. Whales must be really expensive to obtain in the first place, and will surely generate a lot of income once in the tank.


----------



## py3ak (Feb 28, 2010)

LawrenceU said:


> Isn't it amazing how deeply Darwinistic thought has infiltrated the worldview of so many. Even those who would eschew Darwinism fall prey to its fruits. Barring some accidental killing of a man, goring would imply intent in the Scriptural illustration, an animal that kills a man should be dispatched. And, an animal that accidentally kills a man twice should as well. Cetaceans are intelligent creatures, for animals. But they are animals. This orca, killer whale, did not accidentally kills that trainer. It knew exactly what it was doing. It is one of the same techniques that is used on seals, a prey animal. Beware of what 'animal expert' you listen to about that behaviour. Those infected with animal rights tendencies will excuse it, not admit that it was a normal behaviour, and somehow blame humans; just like they have each time before.
> 
> Kevin, the link you posted would be hilarious if it weren't so sad and infuriating. Yes, I realise it is satire. The problem is I know people who think like that.


 
I'm not sure if this was directed at me or not. But I assume that if a toddler pulls a cat's tail and gets a scratch or a bite for his pains, no matter what correction is administered to the cat, the toddler is also taught not to be stupid. I think that's Austin's point, and I know it's mine: if an animal feels threatened or has been mistreated then it is only natural to expect them to react rather strongly, and the people who have forgotten their instinct for self-defence, or have created the perception that they are not safe among humans, bear some responsibility for whatever happens.


----------



## Jon Peters (Feb 28, 2010)

LawrenceU said:


> Isn't it amazing how deeply Darwinistic thought has infiltrated the worldview of so many. Even those who would eschew Darwinism fall prey to its fruits. Barring some accidental killing of a man, goring would imply intent in the Scriptural illustration, an animal that kills a man should be dispatched. And, an animal that accidentally kills a man twice should as well. Cetaceans are intelligent creatures, for animals. But they are animals. This orca, killer whale, did not accidentally kills that trainer. It knew exactly what it was doing. It is one of the same techniques that is used on seals, a prey animal. Beware of what 'animal expert' you listen to about that behaviour. Those infected with animal rights tendencies will excuse it, not admit that it was a normal behaviour, and somehow blame humans; just like they have each time before.
> 
> Kevin, the link you posted would be hilarious if it weren't so sad and infuriating. Yes, I realise it is satire. The problem is I know people who think like that.


 
To assume that it's Darwinian thought that causes me to disagree with you is just an assertion with no proof (I know the comment wasn't directed as me personally and that you are not attacking, but I think I fall in the group that disagrees with putting any animal down that kills a human). I don't agree that the Exodus passage is applicable. I also don't disagree that livestock or a domesticated animal should be put down should it continue to attack humans. That was not the case in this instance. It was a wild animal in captivity. I say stop giving money to places like Sean World and let them go out of business. They are cruel places. It does matter how we treat animals.


----------



## TimV (Feb 28, 2010)

Jas 3:7 For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind,


----------



## Peairtach (Feb 28, 2010)

The putting down of animals, however valuable, when they kill humans is an important reminder of the sacredness of human life more to all humans rather than to animals, who don't usually read the newspapers. It is the way God wants us to remove blood-guiltiness and the potential for further loss of life in such cases. The whale should be humanely put down, inspite of the foolishness of human beings trying to play games with such creatures.

With the massive erosion of respect for the sacredness of human life in the West, e.g. the abortion holocaust, assisted suicide, euthanasia, allowing properly proven murderers to live, letting the whale live will be a very minor sin to add to the West's blood-guiltiness, and will not even be a footnote in the doom of the West.

I agree that such whale circuses are probably less than necessary and that we can enjoy seeing whales in all sorts of better ways, e.g. DVD, in God's providence today.


----------



## JennyG (Feb 28, 2010)

Richard Tallach said:


> The putting down of animals, however valuable, when they kill humans is an important reminder of the sacredness of human life


I totally agree. I mentioned the probable monetary value of the creature as a possible factor in its owners' reluctance to do away with it (I wonder, would they be able to turn the carcass into cash, or would its devoted fans demand a respectful interment? That really _would_ cost) but I definitely didn't mean to imply that it made any difference to what was the right thing to do. 

If only its keepers had simply had the good sense to treat the whale as the dangerous wild creature it was, and allow no-one that near to it..


----------



## earl40 (Feb 28, 2010)

If one chooses to play with rattlesnakes and gets bit....well? I think the trainer knew the risk and she chose to play with fire In my most humble opinion. This is totally different than a cow killing someone.

---------- Post added at 01:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:54 PM ----------




TimV said:


> Jas 3:7 For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind,


 
Is this supposed to mean that Tillikum was tamed?


----------



## LawrenceU (Feb 28, 2010)

In my post above, I was not alluding to anyone on this board, per se. I was addressing the fact that animals will respond as animals, tame or not. When that response results in the death of a human, the animal should be killed. Animals are not sacred. They exist to glorify God and serve man. When they cease to do that they do not deserve to live. That may sound crass and cruel. I assure you I am not. I have pets, have raised all sorts of animals. Trained dogs, horses, and other animals. That experience also teaches me that there is a distinct gulf between animal and man.


----------



## earl40 (Feb 28, 2010)

LawrenceU said:


> In my post above, I was not alluding to anyone on this board, per se. I was addressing the fact that animals will respond as animals, tame or not. When that response results in the death of a human, the animal should be killed. Animals are not sacred. They exist to glorify God and serve man. When they cease to do that they do not deserve to live. That may sound crass and cruel. I assure you I am not. I have pets, have raised all sorts of animals. Trained dogs, horses, and other animals. That experience also teaches me that there is a distinct gulf between animal and man.



So if someone falls into the shark tank at Seaworld and all the sharks participate in ripping the person apart? Should they all be killed? Also you have raised animals and understand that you don't turn your back on a rainy bull. You point on the gulf between man and animals is of course correct.

Save WILLY!


----------



## LawrenceU (Feb 28, 2010)

Your analogy between the sharks and the orca is fallacious. My comment is made in the context of _trained_ animals. That orca was a highly trained, socialised animal. That is a different scenario than a tank full of sharks, or an orca in the wild.


----------



## Montanablue (Feb 28, 2010)

LawrenceU said:


> Your analogy between the sharks and the orca is fallacious. My comment is made in the context of _trained_ animals. That orca was a highly trained, socialised animal. That is a different scenario than a tank full of sharks, or an orca in the wild.



I think the issue here may be if its possible to train an orca. Now, I actually don't know. I do know that there are a lot of animals that you cannot tame (mountain lions, moose, bears etc) and it would be very risky to try to do so for entertainment value. I would not be terribly surprised if orcas were in this category since they are predators.

For the life of me, I cannot figure out why the orcas must put on a show. Why isn't it enough to just have them in the aquarium?


----------



## LawrenceU (Feb 28, 2010)

Trained and tamed are two different matters.


----------



## Montanablue (Feb 28, 2010)

LawrenceU said:


> Trained and tamed are two different matters.


 
Certainly, and I'm not sure if you can do either to an orca. Generally, most predatory animals can't be either trained or tamed. (Dogs and cats being an exception - but they've been domesticated for centuries. Wild dogs and cats are neither tamable or trainable). Again, I'm not saying that animals that attack humans shouldn't be killed - I think they should be. But it seems extremely foolish to assume that wild animal is going to respect you. Its like the tourists that come up here and expect the bison to pose with them in photos. Do that, and you're going to get gored.


----------



## earl40 (Feb 28, 2010)

LawrenceU said:


> Your analogy between the sharks and the orca is fallacious. My comment is made in the context of _trained_ animals. That orca was a highly trained, socialised animal. That is a different scenario than a tank full of sharks, or an orca in the wild.


 
True you have a point, though it could be said that a 20,000 pound "trained" animal should probably not be used in the way they do. In other words, the death penalty for the fish would be an affront to God because it did what orcas do....."trained" or not. Seaworld is the culpable party here and not an animal in my opinion.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Feb 28, 2010)

Richard Tallach said:


> The putting down of animals, however valuable, when they kill humans is an important reminder of the sacredness of human life more to all humans rather than to animals, who don't usually read the newspapers. It is the way God wants us to remove blood-guiltiness and the potential for further loss of life in such cases. The whale should be humanely put down, inspite of the foolishness of human beings trying to play games with such creatures.


 
I think this is a very important point. If, by its very nature, it is a terrible thing to kill an animal due to the stupidity of humans then the Law of God prescribed in Torah would have been unholy.

One of the things to meditate upon in the Law of God is how God put a hedge around the protection of human life to make even accidental killing something that a man could lose his own life over if the avenger of blood caught up to that person before he escaped to a city of refuge. You accidentally drop a rock on a man's head while working on your house and the next thing you know you have to live in another city until the High Priest dies.

Think about what kind of care that instilled in people to be very safe with human life. We worry about liability and monetary costs if we're associated with making a product that kills a person. In OT Israel, you were taking your life into your hands if you were careless.

The general equity of the Law is not the stupidity or culpability of the person killed by an animal or another but has to do with the sacredness of human life and I believe we all need to meditate upon that when something like this happens.

Stupid or not, that woman bore the image of God. That part of the equation about whether or not the animal should be put down is so foreign to this society that it's not even a consideration.


----------



## LawrenceU (Mar 1, 2010)

Very well put, Richard.


----------



## au5t1n (Mar 1, 2010)

Haven't you guys ever seen a Shamu show at SeaWorld? Orcas can most definitely be trained, and trained well. I think this particular whale falls into the rogue household pitbull category. We don't stop owning dogs just because one goes crazy, but we do put the one psycho pitbull down. I also don't think it's fair to accuse SeaWorld of cruelty for owning whales and using them in shows. These trainers have a bond with their animals. PETA doesn't know what it's talking about, and none of them loves animals more than killer whale trainers do. My point before was simply that when capturing predators and putting them in a restricted environment, wisdom is needed to prevent human death. It is inevitable that someone will die without reasonable precaution. They are large predators.


----------



## OPC'n (Mar 1, 2010)

Yeah the whale needs to go to bye bye land. However, God did not intend for His whales to be put in a swimming pool to entertain Americans. We shouldn't even be taking them out of their natural habit for our entertainment. If they could assist us in our work somehow, then so be it. But wild animals have homes which God gave to them and they should be left there. They fulfill their duties to God and man by allowing them to live where God intended for them to live. Mankind however has always wanted to go against what is natural or what God intended. All animals have a nature to kill. Our bull had that nature but we managed him bc we needed him for our livelihood and not for entertainment. There is no reason to put human life at risk for the entertainment of the masses....it's just wrong. Send the whales home.


----------



## TimV (Mar 1, 2010)

If we have dominion over the earth and it's creatures, we can do whatever we want with them, within the bounds of Biblical law. And those laws prevent cruelty, like regular weekly rest on the Sabbath, not restricting feed while working, etc...I can enjoy fish in my big tank, tarantulas from South America, my pet boa constrictor and seaworld mammals without having a guilty conscience. And I can think it's pretty cool that the South African navy took out a couple Soviet military transports using trained dolphins in Luanda harbor


----------



## coramdeo (Mar 1, 2010)

My wife breeds show rabbits. She will not tolerate any rabbit that repeatedly bites. She will not breed that rabbit as it's offspring will most likely bite as well. Aggressive tendinces are genetic. If it is a really good show rabbit and wins often, she may keep it and show it, if the bitting is moderate, but she has put down any that are especially aggressive. I understand that this isn't the same as an animal killing a human, but the point is that this tendency is genetic........they should not be bred.


----------



## Tripel (Mar 1, 2010)

show rabbits???


----------



## Mushroom (Mar 1, 2010)

OPC'n said:


> Yeah the whale needs to go to bye bye land. However, God did not intend for His whales to be put in a swimming pool to entertain Americans. We shouldn't even be taking them out of their natural habit for our entertainment. If they could assist us in our work somehow, then so be it. But wild animals have homes which God gave to them and they should be left there. They fulfill their duties to God and man by allowing them to live where God intended for them to live. Mankind however has always wanted to go against what is natural or what God intended. All animals have a nature to kill. Our bull had that nature but we managed him bc we needed him for our livelihood and not for entertainment. There is no reason to put human life at risk for the entertainment of the masses....it's just wrong. Send the whales home.


Wow! This MUST be an important subject to have brought Sarah out of hiding! Welcome back, sis!


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Mar 1, 2010)

The animal should have been "put down" the first time it killed a man. Not because the animal is anything but a dumb animal, has a "liking" for human flesh, or even because of "Moses' Law" per se. But because of what has been stated several times now: the image of God is to be recognized and acknowledged by US; by we, the living human population. Send the beast to God, as is fitting; and if he has an afterlife for animals, great. That's his business.

That is WHY that law mentioned was instantiated in the Israelite code. That IS the "general equity" of the precept.


----------



## EricP (Mar 1, 2010)

Perhaps off the point a bit, but isn't it particularly humanist of the Sea World folks to think that a wild "killer" animal can be trained by them to be as harmless enough to dive on into the pool with it and go for a refreshing swim? Animals do as animals do. And a bit like other animal spectacles, isn't part of the Killer Whale Frolic show the risk (but we won't talk about it above a whisper) that someone MIGHT get hurt? Oh gee, look at that little person in the wetsuit standing on the nose of the killer whale! Sadly the whole concept seems bad, both in the eyes of the trainers/producers and the audience. Anyone care to guess what the Sea World Killer Whale show revenues might be over the next 6 months?


----------



## Brian Withnell (Mar 2, 2010)

Wild animals are wild, but oxen start out wild, and are domesticated. Their natural environment is different than what we put them into ... just like the orca. In I totally agree with those that have said the animal should have been killed the first time around.

From the passage TimV cited, the second time around, the owner of the animal should also have faced the death penalty as well. If a dog is known to attack, and it then kills someone, the owner of the dog should be subject to death because they did not destroy the violent dog after the first attack. My Dad always said that if our dog ever bit anyone once, it would be put down. You don't allow an animal to attack the image of God and live ... no matter what the animal, no matter wild or domestic.


----------



## Theogenes (Mar 2, 2010)

I agree that Tilikum should have been put down after the first death, but come on, strike three and he should for sure be put down. There's a reason why they're called "Killer Whales".


----------



## JennyG (Mar 2, 2010)

I blame _Free Willy_


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Mar 2, 2010)

The strange logic of naturalistic ethics goes something like this:

1. Whatever your DNA inclines you toward is normal and good
2. The genes of a Killer Whale incline it toward killing another animal
3. Killing another animal is good

A woman is an animal...


----------



## VanDood (Mar 2, 2010)

I think that the correct passage regarding this is in Genesis 9:5-6, God's covenant with Noah: 

"And for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning: from every beast I will require it and from man. From his fellow man I will require a reckoning for the life of man. Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image."

If this law had been obeyed, two lives may have been saved.


----------



## JBaldwin (Mar 2, 2010)

Semper Fidelis said:


> The strange logic of naturalistic ethics goes something like this:
> 
> 1. Whatever your DNA inclines you toward is normal and good
> 2. The genes of a Killer Whale incline it toward killing another animal
> ...



Yikes!!!


----------



## Montanablue (Mar 2, 2010)

JBaldwin said:


> Semper Fidelis said:
> 
> 
> > The strange logic of naturalistic ethics goes something like this:
> ...


 
I also misread the meaning behind this post the first time and became very concerned.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Mar 2, 2010)

Sorry if I alarmed anyone. I'm speaking as a naturalist would reason. After all, are we not told that some people are pre-disposed toward certain behavior and it is therefore normal. Whatever _is_, ought to be the case according to this fallacious reasoning.

I obviously don't believe women are mere animals any more than I believe a man is.


----------



## awretchsavedbygrace (Mar 2, 2010)

I dont think a killer whale should be kept in captivity. It is a stressful enviornment for these animals. Let them go and dont capture anymore for these shows. The animal will be happier in its natural habitat and no one else will die. Case solved.


----------



## TimV (Mar 2, 2010)

> Sorry if I alarmed anyone.



But if your wife said that you were an animal, the rest of us would assume it was a complement. I guess it's one of those gender things.


----------



## JBaldwin (Mar 2, 2010)

Semper Fidelis said:


> Sorry if I alarmed anyone. I'm speaking as a naturalist would reason. After all, are we not told that some people are pre-disposed toward certain behavior and it is therefore normal. Whatever _is_, ought to be the case according to this fallacious reasoning.
> 
> I obviously don't believe women are mere animals any more than I believe a man is.



What do you mean? I thought all men were animals. 

Seriously, I knew what you were trying to say. I was remarking at where wrong thinking will lead.


----------



## earl40 (Mar 4, 2010)

I wonder...what do the rattle snake handlers do in church when it bites them?


----------



## Blue Tick (Mar 4, 2010)

Romans 1:22-25

22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 

23And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 

24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 

25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.


----------



## LawrenceU (Mar 5, 2010)

Blue Tick said:


> Romans 1:22-25
> 
> 22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
> 
> ...



Yep. That is why I mentioned Darwinism earlier.


----------

