Theos-Talk Archives (November 2003 Message tt00053)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bartl@s...> wrote:
> Bullshit. The precept, translated from Hebrew, states, "don't 
murder." 
> There's a difference between murder and killing.

Bullshit. There are numerous references in ancient writings which 
make it clear there was an animal rights movement in ancient times. 
The fact that the precept was worded as tersely as it was suggests, 
but does not prove, that whoever wrote it might have been a member of 
a reform movement trying to turn people away from the idea that 
wanton slaughter was a good thing. Whether he was combating the sort 
of slaughter Elijah supposedly engaged in (people who did not agree 
with him on matters theological) or the type Samson engaged in 
(slaughtering people who did not belong to his tribe) or whether he 
intended to widen it to include slaughter of non-human creatures is 
impossible to prove at this late date. That there were people then 
as now concerned with the welfare of animals is a documented fact. 
It is impossible that this could have been true without these same 
folks also being concerned about killing of humans who did not belong 
to one's religious or national gfoup.

Consider this: on the one hand you have Abraham, seriously 
considering the ritual slaughter of his own child, and on the other 
Alan Dershowitz, who once said publicly he would have indicted 
Abraham. Both belonged nominally to the same religion, but they 
exemplify the result of four thousand years of social evolution. A 
problem arises if one believes that social evolution is either 
impossible or impious, and that Abraham had the truth that we today 
should follow. That view seems untenable to me, but if one were to 
espouse it one would be compelled to water down the commandment 
against killing to the point that the intent of the original author 
would certainly not be respected.