The the fine People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) have enlisted some hollywood star power to offer tight reasoning for animal rights.

I think that we should tell the Coyotes about animal rights...obviously we need to tell them that they should not eat other animals...particularly cats. The tightly reasoned logic will have me ridding myself of all leather products and forsaking meat forever...nah, scratch that - I'm still not convinced.

I have a few simple questions for the radical animal rights activist:

If human beings are but animals ourselves, why do we have a moral duty to care for other animals - they all do eat one another you know.
If we DO have a moral duty to care for creation, including kind treatment of animals...are we not distinct from mere animals?
Yet a purely naturalistic worldview does not support human beings as being distinct or afforded any special status from other animals. So why can't we do whatever we want to survive and pass on our genes? Including using baby seal skins as coats?

It seems to me that only a view that holds that human beings are created in the image of God as co-rulers and stewards with him over creation could have a moral responsibility for how we treat other creatures. I remain unconvinced that certain animal rights positions are coherent, let alone worthy of such radicalism as exhibited by the good people of PETA.