Macaque Selfie and an Evolutionary Worldview
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen
We have seen many instances on this site alone of bizarre material submitted as science, especially when attempting to support universal common ancestor evolution. Perhaps the silly practices in the secular science industry are an extension of Western society as a whole. It is one thing that David J. Slater's unattended camera was used for pictures and a "selfie" by a macaque monkey (monkey see, monkey do?), it is quite another that there were court battles about the selfie. Most notable is one based on an eldritch view of animal rights.
Slater thought he owned the copyright, but the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals drew up the reigns and hollered, "Whoa!" This extremely liberal court has rulings frequently overturned by the US Supreme Court, so it is surprising to me that they did not side with PETA's "next friend" attempt at getting legals status for the monkey. PETA was also attempting to get money, which would probably be used to support domestic terrorism. Why was this "monkey as a person" thing not thrown out of the legal system long ago? Our indoctrination in evolutionary thinking is one big reason.
Indeed, there have been attempts in the past to give chimpanzees legal rights, but an unborn human child does not have rights. For that matter, do a search on "personhood amendment", where ballot initiatives are undertaken to give the unborn babies the legal status of persons, which is what they are anyway. Also, the not-so-Great Britain seems to be developing a habit of demanding the deaths of ill young children like Alfie Evans and Charlie Gard. People are less important than animals, it seems.
Simply put, the secular view is that since we have all evolved, humans are just another animal. It is an interesting self-contradiction: we climbed to the top of the evolutionary scale, so we should be able to do what we need or want to ensure our survival and prosperity. Why are humans crying about "other" animals?
Don't be disunderstanding me. We have been given a responsibility to care for animals and refrain from gratuitous and unnecessary killing. Despite eco-terrorists like PETA and the Unabomber, and movements to care for the environment and the critters we share this here planet God gave us are usually well-intentioned. But we are most definitely unique, not "just another animal", and are created in God's image. Evolutionary thinking is incoherent, and the biblical wordview — beginning from Genesis — is the only one that makes sense.
This article was inspired by Dr. Albert Mohler. (That's been happening a few times recently for some reason.) Anyway, I recommend reading the transcript or hearing his commentary on the segments, "A monkey’s day in court: What happens when a secular society loses the ability to ground human dignity in anything objective", and "Wonder turns into confusion: The inevitable outcome of taking an evolutionary understanding of humanity". To investigate, click on the Wednesday, Apr. 25, 2018 edition of The Briefing.
One other thing I'd like to suggest. It's a sermon about 35 minutes in length by the late Adrian Rogers. It's called, "What's Wrong with Animal Rights?" The direct MP3 download link is here.
We have seen many instances on this site alone of bizarre material submitted as science, especially when attempting to support universal common ancestor evolution. Perhaps the silly practices in the secular science industry are an extension of Western society as a whole. It is one thing that David J. Slater's unattended camera was used for pictures and a "selfie" by a macaque monkey (monkey see, monkey do?), it is quite another that there were court battles about the selfie. Most notable is one based on an eldritch view of animal rights.
 |
| This version of the image, ruled as having no copyright, obtained at Pixabay from WikiImages |
Indeed, there have been attempts in the past to give chimpanzees legal rights, but an unborn human child does not have rights. For that matter, do a search on "personhood amendment", where ballot initiatives are undertaken to give the unborn babies the legal status of persons, which is what they are anyway. Also, the not-so-Great Britain seems to be developing a habit of demanding the deaths of ill young children like Alfie Evans and Charlie Gard. People are less important than animals, it seems.
Simply put, the secular view is that since we have all evolved, humans are just another animal. It is an interesting self-contradiction: we climbed to the top of the evolutionary scale, so we should be able to do what we need or want to ensure our survival and prosperity. Why are humans crying about "other" animals?
Don't be disunderstanding me. We have been given a responsibility to care for animals and refrain from gratuitous and unnecessary killing. Despite eco-terrorists like PETA and the Unabomber, and movements to care for the environment and the critters we share this here planet God gave us are usually well-intentioned. But we are most definitely unique, not "just another animal", and are created in God's image. Evolutionary thinking is incoherent, and the biblical wordview — beginning from Genesis — is the only one that makes sense.
This article was inspired by Dr. Albert Mohler. (That's been happening a few times recently for some reason.) Anyway, I recommend reading the transcript or hearing his commentary on the segments, "A monkey’s day in court: What happens when a secular society loses the ability to ground human dignity in anything objective", and "Wonder turns into confusion: The inevitable outcome of taking an evolutionary understanding of humanity". To investigate, click on the Wednesday, Apr. 25, 2018 edition of The Briefing.
One other thing I'd like to suggest. It's a sermon about 35 minutes in length by the late Adrian Rogers. It's called, "What's Wrong with Animal Rights?" The direct MP3 download link is here.