So according to many people we are not animals, and not only that our lives are worth more than any others?

Question

This was a response to a previous question of mine... "A human being has a soul---therefore more value than anything on this planet. To end a human's life is one of the most terrible things anyone can do. To end an animal's life is, well, ending the life of an animal."
I find this to be disturbing in more ways than one, I hold all life at equal value.. I dont believe we humans are more valuable than other life on this planet. Dont you think its a dangerous world view(or religion) that places humanity above all else? I mean if we are worth more than anything else who cares if you kill every other living thing on this planet.. it's just an animal right? But aren't we ALL animals? We are all born, we all live and we all die... we all came about on this planet together who are you to say that human life is more valuable?? This is yet another reason I shy from religion, its so egocentric...

Please share your views and list your religion/belief or lack thereof.. I am interested to see if atheists feel human life is more valuable than other life as well...

I am Agnostic as well..

Every animal (including humans) has it's own form of communication or language we have just not progressed far enough to decipher it yet.

Joker.. if you put humans back out in the wild you see pretty quick we are not top of the food chain.. we have merely removed ourselves from it.. to the detriment of our species I think...

But HOW is a human worth more than a dog? In what way do you measure value of life? Did you not know that humanity as it exists today would not be here if it weren't for cats and dogs? They contributed more than most care to admit.. cats in the development of agriculture and dogs in everything...

Thank you sailcat64.. I was beginning to think nobody saw that little truth..

I dont think it is wrong to kill animals for food either, by the same token I dont think its wrong for animals to kill HUMANS for food either...

Rif.. dont jump to conclusions or presume to know my beliefs, I just said I see nothing wrong with eating animals.. that doesnt mean I think we are above them. Does that mean that a wolf is better than a deer because they eat them? or maybe a deer is better than an acorn because they eat that? Its senseless what you say.. I think all life is equal.. no value should be ascribed, and nature is my doctrine.. in nature eating others to live is natural.. that is what I believe, I also believe that doesnt make us better it makes us the same as everything else..

Reverent reflections.. to me it is not a question of value, its a question of love. I would expect another person to save the one they loved over even my own family, I would understand.. even if it was their dog and my sister drowning.. if they chose the dog how could I hold it against them? in any situation where you had to save someone and make a choice who to save it will always be the one you love the most. About self-defence I never spoke of that, of course I would defend even a stranger from a hungry wild animal, if I could. If I saw a strange dog attacking someone I would intervene thats a different question entirely... If a strangers dog and my dog were drowning I would save my dog, and they would save theirs.. see what I mean??

Answer 1

Is funny, or tragic, that many religious people use the concept of soul to elevate the humans to a semi-god level. The only truth for me is that we are part of the circle of life in the macro and micro Universe and we are not better than a ant, a cat, a shark a flower or a tree. The only way to understand the nature is accepting that we are only a component on the entire Universe.

Answer 2

That is a wonderful question, and I see you have a lot of answers. To me, we might be more evolved or whatever, in that we know we will eventually die, and It is uncertain whether animals do,(maybe they do ...look at the elephants ...)but even if this is the case, I do not think that means that our lives are more valuable that other lives. I mean look at it, valuable to who? Perhaps to us, of course, our lives are more valuable and we would save the life of a person first in a burning building, and the dog second. But to the world, to our planet, all life is a part of that oft mentioned circle of life, of which we are only one little part.

We could not survive alone. Any one species can survive if one other species dies out completely. Even the koalas would learn to eat something else if all the eucalyptus trees died (or they would be struck down by natural selection) but no species could live here alone. We all need each other and therefore, no one species, ourselves included, is more important or valuable to the world than another. To think so is to fall back on the Christian idea of having dominion over nature, an idea that makes me want to scream! How arrogant can they get?


Interseting and thought provoking question, I love it!
Bright Blessings,
Lady Morgana )0(

Answer 3

Just because someone believes that a human life has infinitely more value than an animal's doesn't mean they want to mindlessly destroy all other life on the planet. I think we should be wise caretakers of what we've been given, and I'm extremely sensitive when it comes to animals, especially my pets. But, a human life has more value because it was created in the image of God.

Think of it this way, if faced with the choice of saving either your beloved pet or an unknown child from drowning, which would you choose if you could only save one? I hope everyone's answer would be the child. Trust me, I understand it would be painful to lose a pet, but if you can hold that much love for an animal, just imagine how much love the parents hold in their hearts for that child. That child could grow up to contribute great things to society. They might grow up to discover a cure for a life-threatening illness and save countless lives, or they might grow up to champion the cause of protecting the environment and protecting endangered species. Could you say the same for an animal?

What if the situation were reversed, and it was someone else deciding which life was of more value - either an animal or your mom, dad, husband/boyfriend, or child? If a wild animal was hungry and about to make a meal out of your loved one, would you hope for someone to step in and interrupt those meal plans, or would you rather nature take it's course to preserve the "circle of life"?

-----EDITED-----

But Kelly, it IS a question of value because that was the entire premise of your original post. But, for the sake of argument, let's take love out of the equation for a moment. Let's say you had within your power to either save the life of a baby or the life of a puppy. Neither belong to you, so there is no emotional attachment to either, and you can only save one. Which do you choose? How do you rationalize and reach your decision? Once you make your choice, you've then placed more value on that particular life. So, which is it - the baby or the puppy? If you chose the puppy, how would you feel about explaining your decision to the grieving mother of that baby you could have saved instead?

Whether you spoke of self-defense or not doesn’t matter - it’s still a valid argument because you stated, “I hold all life at equal value.. I don’t believe we humans are more valuable than other life on this planet.” You also said, “…by the same token I don’t think its wrong for animals to kill HUMANS for food either.” If you truly believe in the views you expressed, then logically, those statements of belief would prevent you from interfering if an animal were attacking someone. If you hold to your beliefs, then that would make the life of the hungry, wild animal equal to the life of the person. How then could you interfere without violating those beliefs? Isn’t it possible you may need to re-examine your stance on this?

Answer 4

All Life is valuable, and too a degree all life is sacred, but if you are one to believe the Bible. Then all of the plants and animals were given to mankind to be in subjection. Now since my wife, and I are moving our lives towards vegetarian eating styles because we do not like how animals are treated in raising and general butchering practices, but other than that I do not feel it is offensive to claim the life of an animal to feed my family, if it is butchered properly. I have a problem if it is butchered by someone I do not know, since I no longer trust commercial processing. That is not to say that the animals life was any less important, but if I had to choose it or a member of my family it loses... but then I also have to say I have been finding a way to make vegetarian meals that are fairly appealing.

It is not that my religion that makes me feel this way but inhumane treatment of food animals, so I resist eating them because I am not going to support uncontionable actions.

I am a Jehovah's Witness

Answer 5

I am not a religious person but here is my take on it:
It's not about what life is more valuable but the survival of the fittest. It is the order of the world to kill animals for food. We may all technically be animals, but we are domesticated, we have the capacity to express, build and advance. Just because religion places humanity above all else, doesn't mean that everyone isn't entitled to live morally, and I personally don't believe it is immoral to kill animals for food beause it is nourishment BUT I do believe it is awful to kill animals for sport or cruelty (obviously).

Answer 6

Placing a value to life is an ambiguous attachement.

Humans are animals, yes. So in that sense, our lives are just as "valuable" as other animals.

However, because I am a human, I care more for the well-being of my own species.

Answer 7

In the bible it says we are above the animals, but it also says we are to take care of them and everything else on earth (Husband corrected me the bible says we have domain over the animals). We are created in HIS image they are not. HE made us and them out of the dust, but breathed HIS breath into us not him. We were told to make sure they heared his word as well as we should to. HE told us that we were to kill humans was a sin. Animals are our food (not that I would eat a dog or any other pet), people are not food for people.

Answer 8

I must be from another generation than you. I grew up knowing that animals are for food and that killing them indisciminately for sport was just stupid and wasteful. This modern mindset is based on some pantheistic doctrine that makes no sense. I mean, according to your ideas about all life being equal, people shouldn't eat vegetables either because they're "living organisms". It can get very extreme and non-sensical past a certain point. India's Hindu religion holds this untenable worldview and has thoudands of starving people, yet they allow all that beef to walk around that could be steak or hamburgers on their dinner plates. It just makes no sense. Human life is far higher in importance and value than any animal life on this planet.

Answer 9

Thank You...We are all in this together. Life should be respected and this religious baloney that is force fed into people is a terrible example of control and suppression. The religionists who support this are of the same cults like Islam and Christianity that support all war and murder. Sailcat64 is quite correct and has an answer that I agree with.

Answer 10

I've always had a problem with the idea that we are above any other living things. There is a web of life. Although we may not see the role a particular creature plays, it may be of great importance. It may only take the breaking of one strand before the whole thing unravels.
*Agnostic