This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Infanticide in higher mammals

raytoman's Avatar Jump to comment 6 by raytoman

It makes sense for some solitary animals, since they are driven to procreate by their genes, to maximise mating chances. An unprotected female is best, next best an unprotected female with young cubs you can kill to make her receptive to you.

Apes however are not solitary and the tribe typically collaborates to protect and rear all their young.

Some people believe (says so in their Book) that you have the right to kill a man, his wife, his kids and all his animals if he offends you but then they are religious and therefore irrational and without morals.

Sentient animals have evolved brains that enable them to learn and pass on knowledge and develop additional synapses.

Unfortunately, religion typically removes the will/need/opportunity to learn and they are ruled by primitive rules, invented originally in antiquity. The more recent inventions are more geared around creating wealth for the inventers, creating communes where the leaders can have as many young wives as they want and can reward their mates by ordering young girls to marry them or, in the case of one of the older religions, recruit only unmarried men as Priests and protect them from prosecution for paedophilia.

With so few atheists, we may never know how humans would naturally behave towards women and children in comparason to the other sentient creatures.

Currently we are allowing tens of millions of children to starve to death or die of unnecessary diseases, we devote much of our time, energy and wealth in devising, improving and using weapons to kill other humans and we wage religious wars at the drop of a sermon which demonises whole communities in the name(s) of our god(s).

Maybe lions and bears (and their genes) aren't so bad after all (compared to us)..

Mon, 02 Jul 2012 00:29:05 UTC | #948416