I have a few thoughts on this one, as its quite a complex topic.   Quite often if someone had complained early on about church leaders sinning using or hurting people, then whole ministries would not have collapsed.  When a leader of a Christian ministry sins it's a huge problem and he should really stand down, till he gets his affairs together and can fix his life, before he brings the ministry down with him.  Backsliding is not the end of the world the prodigal son was accepted back into the Lord's fold but if you are in a position of Christian leadership and living in a backslidden state that is not going to be accepted by anyone.  I would recommend if a ministry leader has sinned a cool down period of a year. In that time they should not be given any access to the ministry and should stay away, but leaders should maintain contact with them and fellowship together in order to support their return when its appropriate.

Human Rights & Animal Wrongs

It was fascinating to watch the news coverage and focus on a whale that was stuck in the Thames in London. News agencies flocked to witness it and people rallied around the water as witness this rare event. In the same week a bill was passed in the United Kingdom protecting animals rights and providing them with a duty of care owed by human beings who assume guardianship over their welfare. What fascinated me though was not the whale itself as it the other people who flocked to the scene, as a result of media coverage and rather it was the attention, compassion, empathy and care that the whales plight aroused.

We already have homes for orphaned animals and sponsorship agreements for donating funds every month to care for an abused animal. We have people giving millions of pounds and dollars to the welfare of animals yet in our society and world we have millions of people who live on less than a dollar a day. Animal charities now receive more public support, than charities that support people in need and crisis.

Animals living in luxury whilst humans are suffering

Sometimes if you breeze through those luxury pet sites you will note how some animals are being lavished with a life of luxury whilst human beings are suffering and do not have access to even basic amenities in the real world. What can be justified about this, yes people can decide to spoil an animal if they wish to rather than support another human being or even child living in abject poverty. However the media must accept that it has a role to play. We know that advertising contributes to our thought processes and influences our buying decisions. Otherwise why would advertisors pay millions to advertise their products if it didn't work? Answer being it obviously does work and hence we must be careful how we tend to spend hours of expensive news coverage watching an animal and their survival when millions of children worldwide are dying daily due to the effects of poverty.

Noone is stating here that animals should be abused, no indeed household pets should not be abused or animals killed off by people until their species is in extinction. It is good to preserve an animal species for future generations to witness the existence off and for the natural beauty of the world to be preserved. Imagine however the price of dog food for a month to provide for a dog for a month costs roughly how much per month around fifteen to twenty pounds at least. Yet to provide for a child another human being living in another country in severe poverty costs  fifteen to twenty pounds a month, so they can get an education and have a better future. Should not our emphasis be on ensuring that all children have an education and food to eat in this world first and foremost before bringing animals which are meant to live in the wild into our homes, feeding them, domesticating them and providing for them and awarding them legal rights as if they are our children. Do you think if human beings were suffering at the hands of one of our animal friends our welfare woud come before that of their species?

Copyright @ Jill Barraclough 2006