| michael kors flats |
Just last month, The New York Times carried an article about
an area of the Pine Barrens slated for development that would
endanger short-eared owls living there, as well as the tiger
salamander. I immediately felt the $1.5 billion resort
development had no business jeopardizing short-eared owls,
wonderful birds I am instantly drawn to. But I was
embarrassed to discover I didn't really care about the tiger
salamander in the same way. I dutifully read up on the
amphibian and brought my sentiments into line with my
political convictions.
Of course species are used as a rallying cry to save a whole
habitat, but the question still remains: How do we know what
to save, at what cost, and why? I often think of the two
missionaries in A Passage to India explaining to the native
population that God's house has many mansions and all are
welcome in it, black and white. But the question of animals
quickly arises--what about monkeys? "Old Mr. Grayford said
No, but young Mr. Sorley, who was advanced, said Yes; he saw
no reason why monkeys should not have their collateral share
of bliss, and he had sympathetic discussions about them with
his Hindu friends. " But the Hindus press the point to a
degree that challenges even the advanced Mr. Sorley:
And the jackals? Jackals were indeed less to Mr. Sorley's
mind but he admitted that the mercy of God, being infinite,
may well embrace all mammals. And the wasps? He became uneasy
during the descent to wasps, and was apt to change the
conversation. And oranges, cactuses, crystals and mud? and
the bacteria inside Mr. Sorley? No, no, this is going too
far. We must exclude someone from our gathering, or we shall
be left with nothing.
We are still in some sense having this exchange, though it is
more urgent since it is not our Father's mansion but our own
that we are debating admission into. And the answer will tell
us something not of the quality of God's mercy, but of the
quality of human civilization.
