Yeah, right. What person in their right mind would designate a monkey as a person? Maybe one whose values are about as moral as a chimpanzee? Wesley Smith writes on culture and religion for “Evolution News,” published by the Discovery Institute. Environmental leftists and others at least sympathetic to their cry have granted “rights” to inanimate objects such as rivers and glaciers as well as to animate creatures like orangutans in Argentina.
In fact, in the U.S. some thirty cities have granted some type of right to some aspect of nature, writes Smith in the recent newsletter (June 4, 2018). But, a lawsuit was recently filed in New York seeking to recognize the “personhood” of chimpanzees. Smith quotes Appeals Court judge Eugene Fahey:
“The better approach in my view is to ask not whether a chimpanzee fits the definition of a person or whether a chimpanzee has the same rights and duties as a human being, but instead whether he or she has the right to liberty protected by habeas corpus. That question, one of precise moral and legal status, is the one that matters here. Moreover, the answer to that question will depend on our assessment of the intrinsic nature of chimpanzees as a species.”
In a latter statement, he suggests that chimpanzees “think, plan and appreciate life” just like human beings do. Really? Are you serious? Who gave this guy a law degree, much less appointed him as a judge? He calls this a “deep dilemma of ethics and policy…” His implication is that chimpanzees are not here on earth “as a mere resource for human use” but that they have “independent worth” with “inherent value.”
It is simply an extreme perversion of nature to elevate animals to the level of humans in arguing that the former deserve “rights” accorded to the latter. It is also clearly against biblical teaching: “For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens (He is the God who formed the earth and made it, He established it and did not create it a waste place, but formed it to be inhabited), “I am the Lord, and there is none else” (Isa. 45:18).
This only indicates the technology is safe, not necessarily effective at stemming hair loss, but it was an important indicator that the method and its equipment cause no harm. cheap levitra http://www.icks.org/html/03_conference.php?seq=21 So, do not take ED only as a sexual dysfunction, as you viagra usa price have read it is more than that. Here are some popular herbs used for more information viagra generic sildenafil the treatment of male impotence. The introduction of perhaps the first pharmacologically effective remedy for impotence, Sildenafil (the active ingredient in buy soft cialis) entered the market in 1998 and ever since then a lot of people; in fact more than 80% men used it and have experienced the goodness of the pill.
The earth was created and given to man for his use: “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth” (Gen. 1:26). Man rules over the chimpanzee. Man is to subdue the chimpanzee (Gen. 1:28). For the benefit of mankind, in whatever way that is needed, chimpanzees exist for man’s use. This is not a plea to abuse chimpanzees or any other animal.
But it is a recognition that: 1.) God created human beings uniquely (Gen. 1:26-27); 2.) Animals do not have rights as they are generally defined legally; 3.) Evolution rejects #1 which leads them to debate #2; 4.) Judge Eugene Fahey has a minority view on the Court of Appeals but when will that minority view become a majority view? 5.) Federal appeals court judges are appointed by the man in the White House.
If (when?) our society grants legal rights to animals, what will be the end result of that? May God save us from such insanity.
Paul Holland
