quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
Do you believe that primitive humans had these powerful weapons? Come on Peter. Follow the logic.
I did answer you, and I will answer you again. We developed our intellect to make up for our physical weakness.
What you fail to see, or refuse to see is that evolution does have facts to back it up. Tested, tried and true. Creationism has no such thing. They are not equal in anyway.
Have you looked into the dolphins? How bout octopus? These creatures are as smart if not smarter than humans. Have you seen the work the military is doing with dolphins? Amazing stuff.
We are not VASTLY more intelligent than all other animals. Before you argue so strongly on a subject be sure and get your facts straight. The bible is not a science book so in this debate it can not be used to demonstrate your point.
Consent is way more than intelligence. Actually you can be as dumb as a box of hair and consent to sex. Animals can't consent due to the lack of communication and understanding. Why is that so hard for you? I actually think you understand, but just keep clinging to your same argument because you have painted yourself into a corner and have nothing else to offer.
Human morals are not horse morals, or cow morals, or any other animals morals. They are ours. Animals have their own set of morals. We may never understand exactly how they think. We have not gotten smart enough yet to communicate on that level with other animals. What we do know from observation is that they have emotions, compassion and care for their own. As with other species as well. I have seen dog raise kittens. It didn't have to. It chose to. Why do you think that is? Have you ever seen the video of the two dogs on the freeway? One is hit by a car and the other keeps risking its own life to drag the injured one to the side of the road. It never gave up. Why would it do that? If it functioned on survival instincts alone (as you have stated) it would have left the other dog behind and made it to safety.
Dog saves dog
So we "developed" our intellect to make up for physical weakness... then why don't deer "develope" intellect to make up for their physical weakness? Or any other animal in the wild that is a constant punching bag on the food chain???? WHY ONLY HUMANS? It comes back to that question. Physically we have limitations that we overcome with intellect and common sense, logical progression of thought. So why not the deer?
And you talking about dolphins??? really??? LMAO!! When dolphins create and develop a device that allows them to travel on dry land... holla back at me. Until then, categorize them as a smart animal of the wild, but don't creep them anywhere near humans. That drives my point home all the more. Even when you find "studies" that show high intellect of a particular animal, it still pales in comparison to humans.
And I say that about morals because there cannot be a consistent standard there. Society dictates wordly morals. What's "moral" in America isn't necessarily what's "moral" in China, Canada, India, etc.. There is no moral code of humans on a purely wordly view.
As for communication, once again, that's VERY flawed. Non-verbal communication is a very important aspect of communication. Now, I obviously don't think humans have ever, nor will ever, be able to communicate with animals for consent. But if "evolution" happened, then it is still happening. Will zoophillia ALWAYS be wrong, or could animals develop the ability to communicate with us? Or can they already on some levels, you just don't want to admit to any of it because it pokes obvious holes in your arguement. Once again, if you infer consent from your dog that it desires to play fetch, or eat, or take a nap with you, then how can you say for a fact that you can't infer consent needed in "zoophilia"? Sex is nothing more than a primal urge right? You are putting too much stock in sex when it is simply a function of animals. By the strict worldly view, I'm finding it hard to understand how you can just mark that one off??
I'm not painted in a corner on this topic. I'm very clear as to the roles of humans and animals as discussed in the Bible. Humans were created seperately, and in God's image. Animals were not. We are over the animals on the todem pole of life. From my belief system, there is no way anyone could ever even ask me that question.
But from the purely wordly, atheist's view of it, how can that be? We must be viewed as the same....we all came from the same ooze right? The same rock that came from nowhere, that exploded for no reason, and randomly changed from simplicity to complexity. Why did ONLY HUMANS become so complex? Billions of species, and only humans? You'll have a tough time convincing someone of that without evidence of scientific testing that explains the origin of all... and unfortunately, no scientific theory does that. Only guesses.