Volume 3, Number 2Do animals have rights? by John Parkinson, N. IrelandDo animals have rights? In recent times this issue has been the cause of
much passionate debate and political activism. The press and media
frequently report on threats and violence against those who allegedly
deny animals their rights.The anti-fur, anti-hunt, and vegetarian lobbies
have become very powerful political forces in society.We are told that
animals have equal rights with humans when it comes to sharing the
resources of our planet. What should the attitude of the Christian be on
this issue?
Does the Bible have anything to say on the subject? Quite a lot! In fact,
the believer is duty bound by scripture to practise good animal welfare.
We read in Proverbs 12. 10, 'A righteous man regardeth the life of his
beast; but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel'. In other words, it
is right for a man to have due regard for the life and welfare of his
animal. Moses actually legislated so that it became a legal requirement
to afford animals certain rights.
Animal rights under the Law of Moses
- The working animal had a right to one day of rest per week,
'Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou
labour, and do all thy work:But the seventh day is the sabbath of the
Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor
thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle,
nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the Lord
made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested
the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and
hallowed it‘, Exod. 20. 8-11. God programmed His creation so that
one day in seven would be a day of rest. The working animal could
easily have been excluded from this privilege. But God stipulated in
the fourth commandment that the cattle too were entitled to this
rest-day.
- If a man saw his neighbour’s animal going astray he was to return it
to its owner, Deut. 22. 1-3. Further, if a man discovered his
neighbour’s ass or ox fallen down by the way, he was duty bound to
help the animal up again, Deut. 22. 4. Thus, a man was not only to
care for the welfare of his own animals, but also for the welfare of his
neighbour's animals.
- It was forbidden to plough with an ox and an ass together,Deut. 22.
10. Such an arrangement would
have been grossly unfair to both
animals. The smaller and weaker
animal would have been at a great
disadvantage, not being able to pull
with the same strength as the other.
The stronger animal would have
had a disproportionate share of the
burden. It would have been a
complete mismatch. Paul applies
this principle in 2 Corinthians 6. 14,
warning his readers that believers
should not be unequally yoked with
unbelievers. Such an unequal yoke
results in a far more serious and
disastrous mismatch.
- It was forbidden to muzzle the
mouth of the ox when it was
treading out the corn, Deut. 25. 4.
The animal had a right to enjoy
some of the good of its own labour.
Yet, it was not really animal welfare
that was on Paul’s mind when he
stated that this was analogous to
gospel preachers having the right
to live off the gospel, 1 Cor. 9. 9-10.
- So far we have been thinking about
the rights and welfare of working
animals, but what about the beasts
of the field? Did wild animals have
rights under Moses? There was a
gracious provision for wild animals
that is often overlooked. Each
seventh year the land was to have
its rest, when there would be no
sowing or gathering. The poor
people of the land were to be
allowed to eat freely, whether it was
of the field, vineyard or olive
orchard. But what the poor people
did not eat, 'the beasts of the field
shall eat', Exod. 23. 11. It is
interesting to observe that when
the Israelites were obeying the law
of Moses, the very beasts of the field
got a blessing! Equally, when
Christians are living close to God,
who can tell the blessings that may
filter through to others?
We can see that there were important
animal rights under the law of Moses.
But how do such rights compare with
the ideas of the modern animal rights
movement?
Are animals and humans
equally important?
The modern animal rights movement
has a very definite anti-Christian
agenda. Their philosophy is rooted in
ideas borrowed from New Age,
Buddhism, vegetarianism, reincarnation
and evolution. The leading premise of
the animal rights movement is that
'non-human animals' have an equal
right with 'human animals' to share the
earth. This is clearly unbiblical. The Lord
Jesus made a qualitative difference
between humans and animals. Having
established that not a single sparrow is
forgotten by God, the Lord goes on to
say that people are of more value than
many sparrows, Luke 12. 6-7. In terms of
intrinsic worth, there is no comparison
between a man and a sparrow.
We can conclude that animals and men
are not equally important, but that men
are of far greater value than birds or
animals. Men are to have regard for the
welfare of animals, but that is a very
different thing to saying animals have
the same rights as humans. In the
creation account of Genesis,we are told
that God gave man dominion over the
animal world. Christians who have
contact with animals ought to treat
them with sensitivity and kindness. We
need not fear such subjects as bio-ethics
or animal welfare. The Christian should
be a highly responsible steward of God’s
creation.We should treat all living things
with the respect due to God’s creatures.
And of course,we should remember the
Lord’s own evaluation and exhortation,
'Fear not therefore: ye are of more value
than many sparrows', Luke 12. 7.Do you agree or disagree with this article do you have any questions? If so then please click here and fill out the comments form as we would love to hear from you. |