Animals - Ours to do with what we like?

As you know my focus is the language and landscape of the myth of eternity.
This for me is a clear example of confusion in the tenets.
I can't figure out how the followers of the bible should feel about this.

RSPCA boycotts Crufts in dispute over breeding of 'disabled' dogs Matthew Weaver. The Guardian, September 16 2008

'The RSPCA is to boycott Crufts because of concerns within the organisation that the show's judging criteria encourages the breeding of "deformed and disabled" dogs. The animal welfare charity, whose patron is the Queen, said the competition promoted breeding methods that were "morally unjustifiable", and announced yesterday that it would no longer hire a stand at the world's biggest dog show, as it has done for the past four years. article here

Is it okay to bend animals to our idea of beauty?

Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

This section of genesis I feel clearly states: Yeah do what you like; mutate the dumb animals all you want. From this interpretation the bible squad should outright disagree with the RSPCA, citing 'every humans 'god-given right' 'to tinker with the evolutionary process to your hearts content', but this section;

Genesis 2:15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

is unclear. In the widest interpretation, it depends on you view of the wording 'dress and keep it', in the narrowest interpretation, does this only apply to 'Eden'; does it still apply after that embarassing 'casting out' business!


Does that mean that the religious
should boycott Crufts along with RSPCA?
Genesis 9:3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.
but this bit suggests a reiteration of the dominion point!

What on earth is one of the
sore knees persuasion
supposed to do here! LOL.

The queen is the figurehead of the Anglican England and, as the article mentions, patron of the RSPCA. Should any breeder whom believes take their lead from the figurehead and also boycott?
Seems like a simple choice doesn't it - breeding of 'disabled' dogs - is a bad thing! But the bible in it's infinite wisdom (LOL) muddyies the choice with unclear instruction.
My tuppence?
When dog shows are about money, kudos and shouting rights for breeders, the dog's become a means to an end. Should 'traditionally' qualified (they're generally not Vets) human livestock breeders be allowed to play the evolution game? I don't know enough too say, so I suppose my tuppence boils down to (as a consultation statement only);
Any breeder found to be promoting a breeding strain that weakens the overal species, should be prohibited from earning a living from animal husbandry.

This is one of the Too many questions

PEACE    
Crispy

Please leave a comment - Anything will do
The best communications are often,
THREE WORDS OR LESS
OR ONE OR MORE FINGERS!

Tweet