Everyone knows bullying is wrong. Kids do it all the time; grown men and women even do it to gain leverage over weaker people or to feel better about themselves. Whether it is playground bullying, college hazing or the more anonymous cyber-bullying, everyone knows it is awful and wrong.
How did we arrive at this conviction
when the animal kingdom exists because of bullying?
The wild animal's life is chalked full of abuse from the time it is born, through adolescence and especially during the mating seasons. The weaker animal forfeits his right to breed or even eat to the stronger, healthier one. Although we as humans are sometimes pained to see this (all of creation groans, Romans 8:22) not one of us would make a claim that the alpha male wolf is wrong in achieving dominance. This is one of the keys to keeping the gene pool healthy. This is just survival of the fittest.
 |
| Sad, but necessary in today's world (Source) |
Tragically, bullying is just as prevalent among people as it is among animals. Go to a playground, listen to kids on the street playing, read online forums or YouTube comments, go inside a high school sports locker room, go almost anywhere in any culture and you will see this behavior. This is a serious problem and almost everyone agrees that it is wrong.
 |
| Clearly wrong |
If "bullying" is what brought about the human race (as evolution would suggest), why should we abandon it now? If it worked so well by killing off weaker animals and keeping them from breeding, and humans are obviously far from perfect, why would we abstain from this behavior now?
Because we all know it is wrong.
Why is bullying wrong for humans but not for animals? It happens just as much in our culture as it does in the animal "cultures". Apparently it is just as natural to people as it is to animals. Kids don't need to learn how to bully, they have to be taught not to bully.
So how does an evolutionist explain why we have our personal convictions or our sense of morality?
How do we know bullying is absolutely wrong?
In my experience, evolutionists will often say that over the years our culture evolved this heightened sense of morality as a survival mechanism. The logic behind it being, "I will scratch your back, hoping you will scratch mine". Then, after millions of years of this behavior at work, we all began to develop morals.
So then who decides what is right or wrong? Perhaps you are convinced that harming others is wrong, but what if there existed a person who had no problem with bullying or abuse (not so far-fetched is it?). Would it be wrong for him to abuse weaker people? He is obviously just acting instinctively, just like any other animal. Perhaps he isn't evolved enough. Maybe he is actually more evolved than you. Nope, still not alright, is it?
OK, so maybe society as a whole needs to define right and wrong. So what if an entire culture or country had no problem with bullying or even murder? Would it be OK then? Of course not! Killing Jews was perfectly acceptable among Nazi circles in Germany prior to WWII's conclusion. That doesn't mean it was moral.
Humans are clearly not animals.
Can a lion murder another lion? No, that is called survival of the fittest.
Should a human even so much as verbally abuse another? No, that would clearly be wrong.
Bullying is often a major factor in teenage suicide and also sometimes leads to acts of violent retribution. This doesn't make bullying wrong, it happens because bullying is wrong.
God has given mankind an inherent ability to see right from wrong. We all are given a conscience, and we are meant to be different from the beasts. Although fallen and carnal, unlike animals we have capacity for compassion, love, loyalty, chivalry and conviction. These things can be tossed aside, but they clearly differentiate us from mere animals.
Our Creator instructs us:
Isaiah 1:17 (NIV)
17 Learn to do right; seek justice.
Defend the oppressed.
Take up the cause of the fatherless;
plead the case of the widow.
Can you imagine what our world would look like if we all followed this instruction? Morality is not conditional, but absolute. This is easily explained by, and even foundational to the Christian worldview, but incompatible with evolutionary thinking.