Since rape, murder and poligamy is common in the animal kingdom and I dont know of any case in the animal world where biological science considers that any animal which uses either rape, murder or poligamy in order to pass on its genes unsuccessful.
Natural procreation in animals and the social ills of "rape" within human morality are not synonymous. Animals cannot be immoral for the sole fact that they have no moral sense. That would make them "amoral," which is very different from "immoral." To do so has you setting yourself up as the arbiter of how animals should act.
My question to the Athiests/ Evolutionists is why can rape, murder and poligamy in the animal kingdom be seen as natural and successful in the eyes of natural selection for all animals, but why does science exclude homo sapiens from conducting such behaviour? why are those people who rape and murder put in prison instead of respected, such as the strong lion? why dont we imprison other animals which commit such acts? isnt this a double standard?
Humans are moral creatures, lions are not. They don't understand morals in the same sense that a human would, so there is no significance and no need to muddle the terms. If things evolved in a different manner, it is possible that the social phenomena we refer to as "rape" could have been very different. It is possible that if through a different set of circumstances, what we call rape might have been natural sexual behavior within this species.
But since it is not, it is useless to speculate.
Since homo sapiens follows a completely different moral code to the entire animal kingdom is it possible that humans fit outside the order of the rest of the animal kingdom? Could this mean we have a different origin? a unique purpose?
Possible, yes. Plausible though? I don't think there is any evidence to support the assertion. We see a less defined sense of altruism in the animal kingdom, but generally increasing depending upon the level of intelligence as well as more complex and defined with mammals. You can call that sense of altruism "less evolved" or "more archaic," whatever you want to call it. In primates it is even more defined as you go up in lineage until you get to humans which have a very well defined set of altruistic and moralistic behavior.
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.
"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston
™ Version 4.2