Keeping Pets in Their Place | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2008 > April

Christianity Today, April, 2008 |

Keeping Pets in Their Place

Why we can't afford to treat animals like they're humans.

Charles Colson with Anne Morse | posted 4/29/2008 08:27AM

2 of 2

You may think that no one would fall for Singer's preposterous arguments. But remember, throughout our history, Americans have engaged in great moral crusades, fighting against slavery, for suffrage, and for civil rights, which went against the grain of their times (and thank God Americans did). But the animal-rights cause is quite different: Instead of elevating human rights, this cause diminishes them by insisting we eliminate the distinction between humans and animals. It would be our moral undoing.

Christians, arguing that humans alone are made in God's image, can make a logical defense of the uniqueness of human life. But if out of sentimentality we treat our pets as if they have souls, we give away the argument. What a tragic irony if the church finds it has been conquered on behalf of our beloved pets.

Related Elsewhere:

Colson's previous columns are available on our site.

first page |

2 of 2

share this page

April 2008, Vol. 52, No. 4

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment

Reader Reviews are below

Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.

Click here for international orders

2-for-1 Gifts!

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Displaying 1 - 3 of 68 comments.

See all comments

ontop

Posted: May 08, 2008 8:42 AM

Ill add my agreement that I would like to see some actual scripture references for statements like humans are "the only part of creation that bears the image of God. Humans alone have eternal souls, which confers unique moral status." Ge 9:4 for example says "But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it. 5 And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. Ecc 3:18 "I also thought, "As for men, God tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals. 19 Man's fate is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath [b] ; man has no advantage over the animal. Everything is meaningless. 20 All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return. 21 Who knows if the spirit of man rises upward and if the spirit of the animal [c] goes down into the earth"

Jason S.

Posted: May 06, 2008 9:11 PM

Mr. Colson need not fear that a naturalistic worldview and a utilitarian system of ethics will lead his audience to "allocate scarce resources" among animals and humans and thereby diminish human rights. In this time of food crisis many of America's animals live far better than many of the world's poor. This has been the case for some time. Rather the issue, it seems to me, is that we value ourselves more than others and therefore the animals that bring us pleasure are valued above other humans.

TrutoJC

Posted: May 06, 2008 1:22 PM

Yes, I agree mostly. I am about to publish my novel which takes place in Heaven. I chose to include certain animals there, especially dogs. Certainly they do not have redeamable souls. But God greatly wants to please His loved citizens. Notice many horses are mentioned there(Rev.19:11,14). Why not our pet dogs? It is interesting that it was suggested God could create new animals there. I never thought of that. In general I am in strong agreement with the abticle.

The allotted time for commenting has ended.