The god who is reputed to have created fleas to keep dogs from moping over their situation must have created fundamentalists to keep rationalists from getting flabby. Let us be truly thankful for our blessings, Garrett Hardin
Maybe it's the other way around? Maybe She created dogs to keep the fleas happy and well-fed.
"... a God who could make good children as easily a bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; who gave his angels eternal happiness unearned, yet required his other children to earn it; who gave his angels painless lives, yet cursed his other children with biting miseries and maladies of mind and body; who mouths justice, and invented hell--mouths mercy, and invented hell--mouths Golden Rules and foregiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; who mouths morals to other people, and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man's acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself; and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites his poor abused slave to worship him!"
Mark Twain - No. 44, The Mysterious Stranger
A neat saying from Garrett Hardin. For what it may be worth, in my honors ethics course I once used an anthology containing an article from Hardin arguing that wealthy nations (or people) should NOT share their wealth with starving nations (or people) for that would just produce more starving babies and eventually everyone would starve. The opposing article was written by a Peter Singer, a famous Australian atheist, who contended it is immoral for anyone to live in luxury while someone else is starving. (Note: You don't need religion to reason about ethics matters.)