The following is email exchanges between me and a friend and I decided to post it here for more comments. Forgive me if it is soooooo long!

ME: You remember our cats and their stories a long time ago, right? They are still with us. Just nothing newsworthy to report! But . . . [Tuesday May 14, 2002, 9:13 PM] There is a special meowing outside our bedroom. I can recognize it. I open the door to the living room and see LB with a gift at her feet for us. I yell at her and throw the dead baby bird in the garbage. At the same time, I hear her running out of the house. I pray for peace and quiet. [9:28 PM] I hear it again. My heart sinks. She is very prolific. Another bird in the garbage. I yell at her again. Does she interpret it as a complement? What else can I do? [Wednesday May 15, 2002, 6:10 AM] I really did expect it. It happens every spring. Mama bird hopping around on trees and screeching. This time it wasn’t that extensive. Maybe she has gotten used to it by now. But mourn she did. What else could she do? Did she wonder why nature could be so cruel? Can cats be cruel? But that’s their nature, isn’t it? Are we humans cruel? We seem to be. Not only to other creatures but to ourselves. Is that supposed to be our nature?...But we are supposed to be moral animals, no? If God is watching us, what does he really want us do? Did he put us in the food chain? We need food to live, right? What else can we eat? Plants? They don’t have feelings? Some think they do. Then what? Maybe we are meant to be in the food chain. Maybe that is not called cruelty. Only, we have to be nice to our own species. Maybe that will qualify us to be called moral. Can even that happen? Maybe one day. In the distant future. For now all we can do is to try.

----------------------------------------

FRIEND: Ahh. This is a longstanding dilemma of nature. I don't believe that cats are cruel. They have been domesticated, so they no longer have to kill small things to eat, but the instinct is so strong that it will not just fade away. I don't think any animal kills to be cruel - there is always some reason which comes down to survival of their species. . . . People also have to kill to eat. . . . . But we are also endowed with a superior brain and the ability to understand morality and compassion. There are probably certain circumstances when even killing our own kind is indeed a survival mechanism. But I think it is our superior brain that also is the source of problems, because it enables us to reason and form opinions and beliefs. Some of these opinions & beliefs are faulty, misguided, even psychotic. This is what causes us to hurt our own kind and be truly cruel.

-----------------------------------

ME: I am in general agreement with all you said. I’ll add only one thing. Granted cats (and other animals) are not intentionally cruel, but how does it look to the mama bird? Although that was a rhetorical question, here is a real one. Scientifically (or thinking in terms of nature and evolution), the existence of ‘food chain’ in our world is considered a natural process. The question of "Why everyone should eat someone else" doesn't have to be answered; or even asked. However to Christians (and other religions of similar philosophy) who believe in a compassionate, just, benevolent, . . . God, the question is: Why did He create the food chain? Why aren't all animals vegetarians?

----------------------------------------------

 FRIEND: That's an easy one. What would the world be like if no one got eaten? What if animals didn't eat insects, for example. The world would be positively overrun with bugs. If everyone ate only plants (which by the way is cruel to plants, as you mentioned before), pretty soon there would be no vegetation left, therefore no oxygen produced, and life could not exist. This can all be viewed as just and good. Depends on your definition and scope.

--------------------------------------

 ME: 1) The first issue you raise is valid ONLY if we look at our world as has been created and exists today. However, note that my question of ‘why food chain’ is based on other possible alternate systems for our world. That is, if God really wanted to do away with food chain, He could have easily devised a different system in which all creatures would consume something without ‘feelings.’ Even *I* could come up with some nifty ideas!! 2) Your last statement; "This can all be viewed as just and good. Depends on your definition and scope" is, however, a very relevant but complex philosophical issue. What is just? What is good? Can we hold God responsive to OUR definitions and standards? Etc. etc. Even though I don’t have the answers to these questions, I’m going to offer you the following. If God really had good reasons of his own to create the world of ours the way he did (full of sufferings for ALL creatures), I’d say fine. And that actually may be the case. But then, maybe we shouldn’t call him just, benevolent, compassionate, etc., the way WE define the terms. Because it is, after all, our life, our feelings, our language and words, and our judgement. No?