Abstract
My defense of Christian responsibility for endangered species and its implications for private property elicited a response on behalf of Jay Richards of the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute. Mr. Richards response, unfortunately, relies more on rhetorical devices and verbal sleight of hand to make its points than substantial counterargument. Once one wades through the rhetoric, it can be seen that Mr. Richardss position does not have a scriptural, ethical, or spiritual leg to stand on. I realize that this metaphor is three-legged, but his argument seems to me to be as stable as a one-legged burro on a rope bridge over the Grand Canyon in a high wind. He is certainly aware that my position has the Bible and the entire weight of Christian ethics, theology, and spirituality in its corner. This is why his opening strategy is to divide his argumentarbitrarily and without any basis in my essayinto a broad and a narrow thesis.