I've discovered this semester, and espeicially the past few days, that Christianity has a bad name. Just in the past two days, my pastor has been called an a** hole by someone who waitressed for him last week, my church has been ridiculed, and a philosophy professor told me that the intrinsic value of a human being has become so widely held that no one needs to justify why they believe it anymore. Therefore, the ends justify the means in morals.
It has come to the point where you can no longer talk about God first. I'm not talking about the Bible, I mean just God in general. You must now start at the existential aspects of life like love, being human, and so on. You must address the here and now before you can talk about God. You have to link their beliefs or their tensions in life to God. It's a scary world out there, full of hopelessness and searching. And its tearing me apart. I spent a good time this morning praying to God to show me how to talk to these people, and help their search.
I'm searching too. All I know right now is that it is sad that you cannot say what church you go to because it turns people away. I guess that isn't too bad though. Nowadays, to talk to a non-Christian who has learned you are a Christian, you have to ask them to suspend their preconcieved ideas about Christianity. It's not looking good for Christianity in America; makes me want to move to Far East.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Monday, November 26, 2007
Animal Rights and Objective Ethics
How should we treat animals? Should we use them in experimental labs? Should we support modern factory farms?
I've been faced with these questions through reading a few articles for a class. The most interesting article I read was by Tom Regan. We is for animal rights to the point that they are equal to human beings. What I though was really interesting about his articles is he developed a ethical system called "The Rights View". This view is simple: every human being has worth regardless of race, gender, disabilities, or anything else because the are subjects of life, or participants of life. He then moves to the basis that animals, being participants and subjects of life, also have the same rights as humans.
This strong view is hard to justify and ultimately it is unsound. But I'm not focused on that really. My concern is that he never justified why he thought that humans should have moral worth. It was a given to him. This is the greatest question that is begged in our culture today - we assume that humans have worth. I am all for this of course, but we never really see if our worldview can justify such a statement. In all my studies in the university and on my own, I have yet to hear any cogent, coherent, or strong enough basis for the justification for inherent human worth outside of God. It falls apart without a transcendent referent.
So how does a believer in God deal with animal rights? Well a Christian can look to St. Francis of Assisi as a start. He or she can also realize that God created man in His image, but nonetheless gave man the responsibility to be stewards of His creation. These different roles do not neccesitate inequality, but the essence of man does. Man has a glory, likeness to God, "divine spark" that no other has. This does not mean to dominate, but the very nature of this spark is to love, care, and be responsible stewards. We must not neglect God's creation; we must take care of it and respect it.
This obviously means to treat creation humanely. At the same time, we must realize differences in moral worth from the rest of creation and humans. By this I mean that it is better for someone to kill my dog than it is for someone to kill my brother or neighbor. This also means that is possible to have animals in experimental settings that treat them as humanely as possible because it is better for an animal to be the first experiment than a human being.
I say this loosely though, realizing that there are always exceptions. What I am saying means that when a human life is at risk than an animal life would be better taken than a human life. For instance, in the disease of AIDS, it would be worthwhile to test animals, as they did when they tested for a cure for polio, for cures than to just let it continue. This assumes, of course, that no other option is viable or as effective. However, when it comes to testing superficial things such as beauty products, or other such things, we should not even feel the need to endanger lives over such trivial things. But when life, disease, and disability is in concern, I see a moral window (although very small).
Finally, in regards to modern factory farms, they are just horrible. This, however, has to do with reform of the system and not eating animals at all (although I have sympathy to the vegetarian and/or vegan lifestyle). I think it would be smart to find any possible way out of supporting large factory farms that treat animals inhumanely. Unfortunately, this is a hard thing to do, especially in bigger cities. It is important though, and something I'm looking into.
I've been faced with these questions through reading a few articles for a class. The most interesting article I read was by Tom Regan. We is for animal rights to the point that they are equal to human beings. What I though was really interesting about his articles is he developed a ethical system called "The Rights View". This view is simple: every human being has worth regardless of race, gender, disabilities, or anything else because the are subjects of life, or participants of life. He then moves to the basis that animals, being participants and subjects of life, also have the same rights as humans.
This strong view is hard to justify and ultimately it is unsound. But I'm not focused on that really. My concern is that he never justified why he thought that humans should have moral worth. It was a given to him. This is the greatest question that is begged in our culture today - we assume that humans have worth. I am all for this of course, but we never really see if our worldview can justify such a statement. In all my studies in the university and on my own, I have yet to hear any cogent, coherent, or strong enough basis for the justification for inherent human worth outside of God. It falls apart without a transcendent referent.
So how does a believer in God deal with animal rights? Well a Christian can look to St. Francis of Assisi as a start. He or she can also realize that God created man in His image, but nonetheless gave man the responsibility to be stewards of His creation. These different roles do not neccesitate inequality, but the essence of man does. Man has a glory, likeness to God, "divine spark" that no other has. This does not mean to dominate, but the very nature of this spark is to love, care, and be responsible stewards. We must not neglect God's creation; we must take care of it and respect it.
This obviously means to treat creation humanely. At the same time, we must realize differences in moral worth from the rest of creation and humans. By this I mean that it is better for someone to kill my dog than it is for someone to kill my brother or neighbor. This also means that is possible to have animals in experimental settings that treat them as humanely as possible because it is better for an animal to be the first experiment than a human being.
I say this loosely though, realizing that there are always exceptions. What I am saying means that when a human life is at risk than an animal life would be better taken than a human life. For instance, in the disease of AIDS, it would be worthwhile to test animals, as they did when they tested for a cure for polio, for cures than to just let it continue. This assumes, of course, that no other option is viable or as effective. However, when it comes to testing superficial things such as beauty products, or other such things, we should not even feel the need to endanger lives over such trivial things. But when life, disease, and disability is in concern, I see a moral window (although very small).
Finally, in regards to modern factory farms, they are just horrible. This, however, has to do with reform of the system and not eating animals at all (although I have sympathy to the vegetarian and/or vegan lifestyle). I think it would be smart to find any possible way out of supporting large factory farms that treat animals inhumanely. Unfortunately, this is a hard thing to do, especially in bigger cities. It is important though, and something I'm looking into.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
The Saints
Yes, I'll follow the tracks that the saints have trod
By the grace of God
I'll walk in the rain of His mercy
Let it soak me down to the bone
And I'll splash in its puddles
And dance in its streams as I go
And, Lord, I'll walk in the rain of Your mercy
All the way home
- from "All the Way Home" by Andrew Peterson
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If there was one thing I could ask some the Saints like Thomas a Kempis, Francis of Assisi, Thomas Aquinas, Brother Lawrence, and others it would be" "How does your devotion persevere?" Now obviously the Scriptures and even these Saints give us an idea and principles to follow. But to sit with them and talk to them about their day to day lives would be different I would imagine. It would be a priceless conversation.
I struggle with my devotion daily. I do not expect to be perfect, but I do expect to become closer to God everyday. Sometimes it does not work, and I know that is fine. We all have bad days; my frustration is not with my sin but with my devotion. I think God is more concerned with my devotion than my sin as well; they are very closely related mind you. The Andrew Peterson lyrics above show it clearly: it is by His grace and mercy that I am able to follow the path that the saint's have trod.
What would you ask the saints?
By the grace of God
I'll walk in the rain of His mercy
Let it soak me down to the bone
And I'll splash in its puddles
And dance in its streams as I go
And, Lord, I'll walk in the rain of Your mercy
All the way home
- from "All the Way Home" by Andrew Peterson
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If there was one thing I could ask some the Saints like Thomas a Kempis, Francis of Assisi, Thomas Aquinas, Brother Lawrence, and others it would be" "How does your devotion persevere?" Now obviously the Scriptures and even these Saints give us an idea and principles to follow. But to sit with them and talk to them about their day to day lives would be different I would imagine. It would be a priceless conversation.
I struggle with my devotion daily. I do not expect to be perfect, but I do expect to become closer to God everyday. Sometimes it does not work, and I know that is fine. We all have bad days; my frustration is not with my sin but with my devotion. I think God is more concerned with my devotion than my sin as well; they are very closely related mind you. The Andrew Peterson lyrics above show it clearly: it is by His grace and mercy that I am able to follow the path that the saint's have trod.
What would you ask the saints?