[Bosco]

That was my quick response to your previous post. I wanted it short and sweet.. ....I think you know exactly why I wrote it.

You may have intended it that way, but that is why I added "Think about it" to my original response.

But to elaborate .....to be 'cruel' to any life is unacceptable. You think it's ok huh?

Now, you're doing the very thing you accused me of - putting words into my mouth. What I did was to challenge your idea of equating a similarly cruel act to an animal and a human child. So, no, it's not acceptable to be cruel.

To animals or to humans.

But to equate the two types of life if you're a Christian puts you in conflict with Scriptures. That's what I'm getting at.

God created mankind (both sexes, folks) in His image. We were also designed to have a relationship with God. Not so with animals. It's a slippery slope when God is taken out of the picture and you're left with naturalism. PETA happens to be further down the slope than almost anyone, but logically, that's where it will end up.

Humans are so worthwhile to God, that Jesus died for their sins, to make restoration of that relationship possible.

[Fawn]

IC. Well....if Vick did this to humans, he would probably (properly) be executed.....not just given some jail time.

[fortheDeclaration]

PETA happens to be further down the slope than almost anyone, but logically, that's where it will end up.

No one cares about PETA.

The issue is being against animal cruelty because it is wrong, not because animals have 'rights'

Stop bringing up a 'straw man' that has nothing to do with this case.

Christians were concerned about animals long before PETA came into existance.