Evidence for God from Science

I heard a discussion on the radio where a man said that bigfeet, if they exist, might be human and thus should not be killed. Which would be a violation of God's law. I hope the following will not make me seem a wiseguy, or even funny. I'm really not trying to be thus.

This talk of the possible humanity of bigfeet got me to thinking. Suppose Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd were real, and just like in the cartoons? Bugs has human intellegence, and can speak and understand at least one languge. Is that enough to give him human rights? Should Elmer Fudd be tried tried for attempted murder?

In this show about bigfeet the man mentioned they had a mock trial of a man for a man killing a bigfoot. I forgot the verdict

I would like to see a mock trial of Elmer Fudd.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that if by some incredible chance, an animal were to demonstrate humanity, human intelligence, emotion, etc. that we should kill it and not look back, because not killing it would violate God? I suppose then if we come into contact with alien life that demonstrated high degrees of what we call "humanity" that you say we should wipe them out on those grounds too?

As far as bigfoot is concerned, I don't necessarily deny that large primates may have lived in certain parts of the Earth a long time ago that walked similar to humans. I highly doubt they live today. I guess my question for you is: Why is killing bigfoot necessary or why is the assertion that we should not kill them be a violation of God's law? What if we discovered a long-secluded group of humans in Siberia or Tibet that were excessively tall?

I would say if we somehow discover large primates in the wild like Bigfoot, we should treat it like any other new species. However, as I consider primates like chimps and apes (and, hypothetically, bigfoot) to be human's closest relatives in nature, I think that treating them poorly on the basis of being animals is particularly appalling.

Ivellious, I will try to make myself clear.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that if by some incredible chance, an animal were to demonstrate humanity, human intelligence, emotion, etc. that we should kill it and not look back, because not killing it would violate God? I suppose then if we come into contact with alien life that demonstrated high degrees of what we call "humanity" that you say we should wipe them out on those grounds too?



Did you think I was advocating killing in such circumstances? Good grief, someday I'll be hanged for the opposite of what I mean. The man on the radio said some scientists think a bigfoot if possible should be killed and studied. He was against it, as am I.

I think something just like Bugs Bunny should have human rights and someone who reacts to it like Elmer Fudd should be tried for murder or attempted murder depending on the circumstances.

How did you construe the opposite of my meaning?

And would you agree about having a trial? And Bugs Bunny having human rights were he real?

Would you believe some people accuse me of over explaining things, I wonder why I do it if I do?:)

Ivellious, I meant to say that killing in that circumstance was against God's law, not the opposite.

OK, when you said " if they exist, might be human and thus should not be killed. Which would be a violation of God's law," you meant it would violate God's law to say that killing bigfoot was wrong, which seemed to me to be wrong.

I then thought you were continuing that line of thought through your Bugs Bunny bit, as if your questions were rhetorically asking about it being stupid to give Bugs Bunny rights.

Obviously, in my opinion, anything with clear human traits deserves special protections and rights. In that case, I certainly think Elmer Fudd should be charged with attempted murder for trying to kill what would essentially be a human, in my book. It's that line of thinking that makes me feel like killing apes and chimps and so on is so wrong, because they certainly have demonstrated that we vastly underestimate their intelligence and capabilities for social and emotional structures.

Ivellious, I tend to think about things that never occur to anybody. Even as a kid it dawned on me that if such creatures as Bugs Bunny were real they were entitled to full human rights. That they were not real was beside the point. If people could not think about them being real, maybe they should not watch the cartoons It occured to me Elmer Fudd was guilty of multiple counts of attempted murder. And I have long wanted to see Elmer Fudd mock trialed thus.

I have always wanted to see mock trials, the concept appeals to me no end. I've only seen one, on TV, where Hamlet was put on trial for the murder of Polonius. IIRC Justices O'Conner and Ginzberg were in the audience.
Google it to find out more if you are interested.

I wish I knew how to get the ear of someone having input in choosing things for mock trials.

I think the trial can be found on http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/70842-1

My computer is very slow, so I don't know for sure

I say shoot the critter.

FL