The uproar over the killing of a lion named Cecil in Zimbabwe by an American dentist, Dr. Walter Palmer, is further proof that secular society inevitably produces moral confusion.
In saying that, I do not in any way defend the killing of a protected animal. First, I do not hunt for sport (among other reasons, my religion, Judaism, opposes it). Second, if the lion suffered for a prolonged period, that would add to my condemnation. Third, if Palmer knowingly killed a protected animal, he should be prosecuted.
Having said that, most of the reactions to what he did are more frightening than what Palmer did.
Since I began writing and lecturing, I have been warning about the breakdown of the distinction between humans and animals (or, as the secular nearly always put it, other animals). For decades I have asked high school students: If your dog or cat (or hamster or other beloved pet) and a stranger were drowning, which would you try to save first?
In virtually every instance, the response is the same: One-third vote to save their dog, one-third to save the human being, and one-third dont know what they would do (or should do but there are few shoulds in the lives of many secular Americans).
In other words, two-thirds of American young people (and by now, presumably adults, as well) wouldnt vote to save a human being they didnt know before the animal they love.