You mean cat's torturing mice, lions eating thier own children, some offspring killing off their brothers and sisters, mates killing their partners after conception, and lions, tigers, hyenas, etc.... who have been known to kill continuously for pleasure. Nature is morally ambiguous.
Unfortunatly, morality towards another specie is a luxury animals can not afford. Even in human species and our high developed moral values, kindness toward other species is a rare thing.
Cats torturing mice is just instinct, they can’t help but to “torture” every tiny thing they see, whether this thing is alive or not. Lions don’t eat their own children (what a nonsense), they kill the children of another male so they can copulate again with the lioness and have their own children. It is a matter of survival and raising their own biological effectiveness. And there’s almost none cases of the lion actually EATING the cubs. Mates killing their partners is also a matter of biological effectiveness, the partner rarely fight back. Animals rarely kill for pleasure, they have the opportunity to kill to eat, and that’s a lot to say because too often an animal will die of starving.
Btw I can excuse animals because they live on a world where they have to be constantly struggling to survive. You can’t expect them to be perfectly moral even if they have a basic morality. And btw, attrocities commited by humans (christians included) are far more terrible than anything u will find in the animal kingdom.
Hyenas have been known to wipe out their own food source, lions kill their own young to stop competition, ants treat 99% of the population like sacrificial robots. I am not sure you can meaningfully debate this subject. Your emotional precommitments seem to determine the truth as you see it not the other way around.
One thing is having a basic sense of morality, and another different thing is to expect a hyena to become a vegetarian. Are you just kidding? :/
I already adressed the lion’s issue.
It’s funny you mention ants, because according to yourself, self-sacrifice is the most beautiful and moral thing someone can do. You see? It’s plain normal even for ants
But regarding to this, lots of ants are clones of the queen, the same happens with bees, that’s why they are such a perfect militar society where self-sacrifice is perfectly normal. She is just using her own clones like tools, but even those who are not clones, are willing to die. Call them patriots, not amorals.
But again, if you want to speak about amoral actions, don’t talk about animals forced to survive, because it is stupid. Talk about humans which don’t have the need to be amoral, yet they are.
This exact dynamic has taken place over and over again. Over 90% of the earths animal kingdom is said to have become extinct before we even existed.
It is more likely for a specie to become extinct because they have lost the “weapon career” against their competitors, rather than because the competitor just wiped out this specie directly. Animals don’t go to war, that’s human’s thing.
Do you guys go to seminars and get spoon fed the same nonsence? Hitler was never a Christian, he only associated with the catholic church in an attempt to gain the influence it had. They rejected him and he spent his remaining time hating them. The title of Darwin's book alone could be used to justify Hitler, he did so many times. As well as Dawkin's statement and many others. You might as well be saying up is down again. The resistance to accept the obvious negative implications of evolution does evolutionists no good. It reduces credability. I do not reject the wars in the OT, or any other negative fact in the bible.
Hitler was a roman catholic, and evolution has no negative implications
per se. But people like you or Hitler can transform this theory in anything you want.
The difference is that their actions are specifically forbidden by the bible, but Hitler's actions are consistent with evolution. So we can't blame the bible when people do things it prohibits, but we can admit that evolution justifies things that are consistent with it. I regard Islam as satanic but won't elaborate here.
In fact, Hitler’s actions aren’t consistent with evolution. If natural selection is not natural, then what Hitler did is nothing like Darwin postulates. What Hitler did is simply an artificial mess that guys like you take as a wildcard to disregard evolution because you know it is a theory that endangers your idea of God. And as you don’t have any scientific evidences against evolution, you simple use hitler. Here u have: :clap
However without God evolutionary principles are all that is left to produce morality. It has undeniable moral implications no matter how narrowly you define it.
As I said, it probably produces morality in the sense that a moral animal will probably be more succesful in a society if he’s moral. But to say evolution produces morality that makes animals wipe out those weaker than them, like Hitler did, is an utter nonsense.
PS: You should take a look to some of the stories about lioness adopting gazelles, chimps adopting orphans (which is actually a disvantageous thing to do), etc. And you could take a look also to your dog/cat, it isn't very difficult to realice they have a morality.
