The wolf is an animal that was an endangered species in the swedish woods. But since a couple of years, the wolf has become more and more aggressive towards humans, animals of the forest and farm-animals. Some people think that its acceptable to hunt and kill the wolf, to prevent attacks on other species - while other people think that the wolf should be left alone, and that the humans must move and take their animals with them, if they can not accept the precence of the wolf among them.
But how come some animals are more acceptable to hunt than others? Why are some lives more worth protecting than others? And how can we decide what to hunt and kill? Is it acceptable to kill someone, just because we do not think it has any feelings? Is it aceptable to kill someone or something just because it lacks a certain amount of reason? Is it thereby acceptable to test make-up on newborn babies, as we do on dogs and monkeys?
In this essay I have tried to give answers to these questions. I have found out that an antropologic christian vision on animalhunting, will accept the hunt of the wolf – if the purpose of the hunt – human satisfaction – is fullfilled.
A more modern christian vision will not accept the hunt of the wolf – due to the fact that all forms of life has the same value. Therefore, is it not acceptable to kill others, by any other means than self defence.
The antropologic christian vision is more interested in the human, than in other animals. If you compare this to the more modern christian vision, they are complete opponents to each other. In the modern christian vision, you must see to the living being, and not only to the human satisfation.