The title of this article is a quote said by Rush Limbaugh--and he is spot on target!
The recent reports this past week claiming that Atlanta Falcons QB, Michael Vick, has allegedly been sponsoring "dog fights" at a property he owned, has sparked outrage, scorn, and disbelief from many in the Atlanta area and around the country.
I do understand being outraged at the unnecessary inhumane treatment of household pets. The video clips that have been broadcasted have been troubling and painful to watch. IMHO, the dogfights are not the most disturbing aspect; but, the needless hanging and electrocution of the "loser" dogs. If injuries dictate, why not put them down in a humane fashion?
But I have also been disturbed at the level of attention this has garnered in comparison to the loss of real human life though. The sixth commandment applies only to God's creatures made in His image: to people (Gen. 1:26-31). It does not apply to dogs.
"Elvis lives and God is dead."
We live in a society that loves to plant trees,
but is swift to uproot marriages.
And we live in a world that will exhaust no expense
by bringing nations together to save a few dying whales,
but is quick to kill unborn children.
For the record, I am a dog owner; have had many dogs throughout my life. Right now I have a black labradoodle (Murphy) and a brown/red haired pit-bull/boxer mix (Precious). Both dogs are extremely smart. lovable, full of life, and gentle. My children and I really like these dogs greatly and they are a part of our family. BUT, let me remind you of something... they are just dogs--they are not people (repeat it out loud with me three times). "They are just dogs; they are not people." Our dogs have always enjoyed tremendous affection and are well cared for. BUT, they are not people. If one of them unfortunately died tomorrow by accidently getting hit by a car or some other tragedy, it would be sad for us all. BUT, we would get another one and move on easily... Why? "They are just dogs; they are not people."
Calling Good Evil and Evil Good
I have lost three family members in my life (two brothers and my father) and their loss was REAL and painful - not just fleeting or temporary. So when organizations like PETA, or the liberal media get their "canines in a knot" over Vick's alleged activity, the obvious question to ask of them is: "why are they not as equally outraged, or more so, at the loss of human life through abortion?" Hear me clear: on one level, I do understand that the violent, inhumane treatment of household pets should be guarded against. BUT, on the other hand, why are some more outraged at pit-bulls fighting rather than the senseless murder of millions of unborn babies?
If you're not outraged by the millions of deaths caused by abortion -- then, and I mean this in the most Christian spirit possible -- please just spare us all the postmodern political-correct skubalon of equating the suffering of animals with humans; and just shut-up about the mistreatment of dogs.
But where is the same outrage when it comes to the senseless murdering of unborn children?
The planet has not gone green;
but it has gone red--
soaked with the blood of the unborn.
Don't miss the message here folks: if those millions of babies slaughtered by the abortionists had been dogs,,, they would have never been aborted. BUT, because they are, Vick might face some serious jail time if convicted, while the abortion mills just continue on with the slaughter of millions more children. And if we cry outrage in our society, then we are the ones who will receive the scorn while the abortionists go untouched by a culture who treasures their pets more than their children.
Let me be clear: killing a dog for sport is not murder, though inhumane; but killing an unborn child is murder and is always inhumane. When was the last time any politician suggested that an abortionist should be prosecuted and receive jail time for the murder of innocent HUMAN life?
Maybe that's something the next YouTube video debate should include. I wonder how Barack and Hillary would answer on this issue...
8 comments:
Right indeed. There are many players in the NFL and other professional sports who beat their spouses, deal drugs perhaps even get away with murdering another human being. As long as they can score touchdowns or shoot baskets, they get a pass. But the mere allegations (I believe even those accused of animal cruelty are presumed innocent) of animal abuse call for summary judgement. What has happpened to the morality of our nation that dogs are held as more precious than people. Dogs have always been part of our family, but as you said They are just dogs
I wrote on this as well and have used this situation as a conversation starter. I have done this with couple people I have worked with and they basically could not give a good answer and seemed a little stumped. I basically asked what they thought of the whole Michael Vick thing and once I got the usual expression of disgust with it I then asked what they thought of abortion. After a little squirming they had to admit that they thought there was a difference but could not say what it was. Try this with those around you and see what they say.
I couldn't have said it better myself. It doesn't make any sense for people to get so outraged over the one, and be so heartbreakingly apathetic over the other.
It's distressing to say the least.
God has given man a conscience, though it's often seared.
I too wish more people had a conscience regarding killing the unborn, but any sign of conscience is welcome, including regarding cruelty to dogs.
Proverbs 12:10, "A righteous man has regard for the life of his animal, But even the compassion of the wicked is cruel."
Incidentally, I read an article about some orangutans being mishandled and mutilized somewhere, and had similar thoughts of comparision to human senslessness towards the unborn. Your post has come as the confirmation of what I was thinking.
Great post.
Becoming a mother (twice) was the most inspiring and motivating event in my life. Being a mother is worth everything. When I see people elevating their pets above themselves, I feel very uneasy. When I meet people who deliberately choose no children, but have pets instead - well - I lack words....
Terry, are you sure this is evidence of conscience or our society's obsession with political correctness? I hope you are right but I'm not optimistic!
Sam
Steve,
Thank you for pointing this out. Being in Atlanta, I am in the midst of the storm surrounding the troubled Vick, and have been contemplating some of the same stuff you have mentioned here.
To see the reaction of the media, corporate sponsors, and the animal rights groups to these charges, and then to compare this reaction to the overall response when athletes in the past have been convicted of spousal abuse, adultery, DUIs, violence, etc., is utterly shameful. And the issue of the unborn just makes it 10times worse (its as if dogs are more 'helpless' and 'innocent' than the baby in the womb).
Sam,
I do think part of it is political correctness.
However, I also think the Christian "blog outrage" is as much Christian political correctness as it is real outrage.
Those who are called psychopaths or sociopaths are often portrayed as having no conscience. But the Bible speaks of no such thing.
It DOES, however, speak of a "seared" conscience. And one of the things that sear the conscience of an individual is the development of cruelty in the heart.
It can start with the "game" of roasting an ant with a magnifying glass for sheer pleasure, graduate to stepping on frogs for sheer pleasure, and go on from there to cats (for whom there is little sympathy) and dogs.
When the conscience is seared to the extreme by "cruelty for the pleasure of the game", you have what is called a sociopath in psychobabble, but is nothing more than a sinner whose conscience is seared to a crisp.
That's why serial killers invariably have a record from childhood of cruelty to animals.
So when one says, "They're just dogs," they are minimizing the seeds of cruelty which lead to a seared conscience. And seared consciences are what led to Roe v. Wade.
Post a Comment