The Absence of Morale

Upon reading the merciless slaughtering of two-year-old, Marius, the giraffe from the Copenhagen Zoo, I felt tears tumble down my cheeks. I scoured the page for evidence of humanity. My search was fruitless.

Marius was executed because he was the consequence of inbreeding. Despite requests for compassion, the Danish zoo shot Marius in the head, dissected his corpse and then fed his remains to the lions. All of this was witnessed by an audience filled with children.

Reading the excuses for killing the giraffe made me question the morale of our human race. This animal’s life could have been saved. Petitions were signed, and there were offers to re-home Marius. But, the zoo ignored the pleas and felt it imperative to assassinate the majestic creature. Not only did they cease his life early, but they did so with callousness and a cold heart.

The slaying itself was so abhorrent it could not have rightly assented as just a ‘removal of a surplus animal’. The killing was done as though it was a form of extreme entertainment.  As if such iniquitous behaviour could be enjoyable.

Some people consider the ruthless killing of animals a hobby, or a sport. Animal hunting, for instance, is a topic that has caused a stir amongst many. Some people hunt foxes and others relish in the killing of larger creatures. Even the royal princes, Harry and William, have taken delight in shooting wild boar and stags, in the spirit of hunting.

The infamous Moors Murderer, Ian Brady, was known to torture and kill animals as a child. His early behaviour was a start to his later murderous acts which led to life imprisonment. We look upon him and all of his killings with revulsion. He killed for reasons only he himself could fathom a justification for.

So, why is the killing of an innocent animal any different in each case? One is a pitiless elimination because of superfluous genetic needs, and we allow it. Another is assassination for pleasure, and we allow it. And lastly there is a person’s whose enjoyment of killing animals led to further evil acts, and from the start, we did not abide it. All have the same consequence. All are done with an apparent hedonistic value. Our wanton casuistry is the only difference. If we force an ineffectual justification for the act, suddenly it is acceptable. It is not.

Death caused without necessity and displayed only for the killer’s pleasure should not be considered entertaining, or evil, when it suits. Life is life, human or animal. Respect theirs as you would respect your own.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s