> Again, I support technological discovery and advancement, and of course it does come at a cost. I've never thought of myself as a tree hugger, yet I do factor in a Scriptural kinship with the rest of creation when assessing what is and is not an "acceptable" cost. This is part of being a human, both physical and spiritual at once, and charged with stewardship over God's world. Fascinating, as I said. :-)

So where does this leave you? You seem to be playing both sides of the net... you support technological advance and all that, but you are against its consequences? Not that I'm attacking you, certainly - I'm just unsure of your position here...

Even so, we can't very well poll all of creation or anything like it to discover what is or isn't an acceptable sacrifice. So, my original question stands: Who decides where to draw the line?

I'll close with a quote from "Come Back to the 5 & Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean" (not because it's unduly relevant; just because I feel like it) - "Well somebody's got to take the blame... Joe says it isn't him... an' you say it wasn't God... then who was it? Edna, honey - was it you?"

dkd1