Here is Robert's response:
What a crock of extreme right Christian fundamentalist horse shit. No, humans don't have the right to decide which species should stay and which should go...natural selection (baby)?!I feel like there's a lot wrong with what was said there, and I wrote a lengthy response. So here is how I responded to Robert (who I hope still visits and criticizes me).
Are you, perchance, on medication?
Thanks for visiting Christian Fearing God-Man. I always welcome new perspectives and readers.
First of all, I think it's clear that you haven't read much of my work here, or else you never would accuse me of being a "extreme right Christian fundamentalist." I don't even have the slightest of inclination towards that persuasion. Maybe you ignored the title of my blog?
Secondly, what is fundamentalist about the notion that if a population of ravenous beasts is starting to kill off your livestock that you have no right to defend it?
Your statement "humans don't have the right to decide which species should stay and which should go" is a logical fallacy. If we don't get to decide which should die, why do we get to decide which should stay?
Answer me this. If you're a livestock owner, lets say cows, and those cows are your livelihood, would you simply stand by and let the wolves tear your cows apart, essentially destroying the things that make you money and put dinner on your table?
Let me guess, you're John Rambo, right? You'll go out and hunt the specific pack of wolves tearing your shit apart.
Oh, you're not Rambo? You're not a hunter? Well then how will you deal? Just get a "real" job right? No, you'd probably ask the government to help you out, just like these livestock owners have done. Pretend you're in charge, and a bunch of the citizens of your town are coming to you asking you to help control the wolf population ravaging their livestock and making it unsafe to go out at night. What do you do? Do you ignore them and tell them that their livestock must die to serve some sort of higher moral principle?
Here's a question. Are you pro-choice?* I bet you are. If so, then how can you tell me a human has the right to decide whether or not another human is allowed to be born, but a human is somehow not allowed to (A) decide whether a vicious animal lives or dies and (B) is not allowed to protect his the lives of his livestock?
*Disclaimer: I'm pro-choice, before you go lumping me into the "extreme right" category.