In light of the recent criticism of the Judeo-Christian religion and it's influence on the notion that humans are superior to animals and all of God's creation, I would just like to point out that critics who in fact state this are less than capable of assuming such a position due to their only sole alternative of argument. That is, evolution.

Despite conflicts regarding evolution, I stand strong in belief of evolution. I also strongly believe in the Bible and the Christian religion. However when it becomes an issue of environmentalism, I oppose those who are quick to judge the story of Creation. We all know this story well, where God creates Man in His image and give him responsibility of all creatures in the sea and on land. In fact, in Genesis 1:26, it states that God says:

"Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let him have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over te wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth".

Many critics would point out that Christians are quick to jump on the word dominion in assuming that God intended the land to serve Man's purpose here on Earth and nothing else.
I believe the Bible, being written by man, contains many flaws. However, I believe even more persistently that true error lies within Man's intepretation of Word, and not the Word itself. Without diving into detail on this point too much, I would like to turn the attention of the reader onto the critics alternatve solution to "humble humankind".

Evolution would state that there is no end goal, that beings would constantly evolve through constant adaptations from generation to generation. Everyone should already be familiar with the theory of evolution, so I should just be able to dive straight to the point. A belief in the truth of evolution would also mean a belief that all organisms are no better than each other. In fact, one could argue that humans are on the lowest of the scales of evolution, being that humans would most likely be easily forgotten by the rest of the animal kingdom if we were to suddenly go extinct.

However, for everyone who criticizes the mindset of the Judeo-Christian religion as encouraging a hierarchy of humans over animals, let us explore what evolution encourages. Evolution is basically and most essentially stating that every living organism only lives so that it may procreate. Keeping this in mind, would it not seem that it is actually evolution that encourages the exploitation of the land by humans in order for humans to survive. Humans do not adapt by growing claws or by developing feathers, they adapt through technology. If technology were what would be keeping humans alive and thriving, then even at the expense of the environment, technology would not be forsaken. This would carry on to the point of the entire destruction of the environment if need be.

This is not about humans lack of foresight for the future in that they cannot seem to gauge that they NEED the salvation of the environment to survive. This is about environmentalists blaming Christians for humans' lack of respect for nature. They claim that, with the evolution as their proof, humans are no higher on the ladder than ants. They do not see, however, that by supporting evolution, they are supporting everything they are opposed to.

Stop blaming Christianity for the world's problems.

Every night for the past four nights I have been having very strange dreams. The ones where you lose something or run away from something. I dont particularly care for them and I feel that I would start my day off much better if I didnt have them. I ran to class today. It was because I was 5 minutes late; but I really wonder, am I just telling myself that its because I'm late for class, am I really just still trying to run away from that dream?

Humans, at least in the Western Tradition, spend an amazing amount of time trying to prove their superiority over other species. Part of this effort has been devoted to finding some uniquely human characteristic, some quality that sets our species apart from lower organisms. We used to say, for example, that homo sapiens was the only animal that reasoned, but studies of animal learning raised serious doubts about that. We said that we were the only creature to make and use tools, but then we discovered that chimpanzees make and use tools all the time. We said that humans were the only animals capable of learning language, but then we taught apes and porpoises to communicate.

One by one, the characteristics that we have held to be uniquely human have been found in other species. The ultimate futility of this endeavor was pointed out by the British philosopher Bertrand Russell:

"Organic life, we are told, has developed gradually from the protozoan to the philosopher; and this development, we are assured, is indubitably an advance. Unfortunately, it is the philosopher, not the protozoan, who gives us assurance."

Perhaps the only uniquely human characteristic is this: So far as we know, we are the only creature that spends time trying to prove its superiority over other creatures. The rest of the animal kingdom seems to treat this matter with indifference.