Controversial scientist, Richard Dawkins, suggests that eating human meat created in the lab may help overcome the 'taboo against cannibalism'.
He envisions human flesh becoming a form of 'clean meat' - a product created using stem cells that could help feed the world without slaughtering any creatures.
The renowned atheist made the comments on Twitter after posting an article about the benefits of clean meat.
The British biologist said creating human meat to eat could be an 'interesting test case' for 'consequentialist morality versus "yuck reaction" absolutism.'
Interesting enough, Catholic Church does not see cannibalism a sin if the situation demands it. I read a book about this accident:ReplyDelete
In the end of the book it was said that what helped those people to "get over" that cannibalism they were forced to do, was a priest who told them after they were rescued that there was no need for confession and absolution about that matter: because Catholic Church approves cannibalism (of already dead people, of course) in such circumstances.
I think eating human meat should be very dangerous. Remember "Mad Cow Disease"?
Oh, and Dawkins just wants attention. It is his style.
Yeah, it is dangerous. You could die from it. I wouldn't eat any meat grown in a lab anyway. I'd rather become vegetarian. R.Dawkins is a typical narcissistic boomer obsessed with "breaking taboos". It's like boomers were a worst generation or something. (not all of them, of course).ReplyDelete
Two words: Soylent GreenReplyDelete
That's the brave new world we've all been promised, I guess.ReplyDelete
This is shocking! How does a mind even come up with something like this? I agree with you about the "breaking of taboos," Sanne. It really does seem that some people are obsessed with this sort of thing, and for what good really? And if people are so concerned with not slaughtering creatures, why not just eat a plant based diet? Maybe they are thinking of some end of the world as we know it situation where plant matter cannot be grown and dispersed. I have no idea! I will say this, though, it seems like the more renowned some people are, the kookier their ideas become.ReplyDelete
A lot of militant atheists appear to have daddy issues, since God is generally understood to be our Father, they spend most of their time sticking out their middle finger direction Heaven. It's like someone told me he doesn't go to church because his pa made him attend Sunday school. Was a boomer, too.ReplyDelete
Lots of these types are very intellectual but have general maturity of a teenager. Rebel without a cause and all that:)ReplyDelete
It is really sad, actually. Dawkins do have a brilliant mind, but because of his issues, he chooses to waste his time on things like this. He could be doing something that would actually benefit mankind but he wants to be attention-seeking little brat. At his age.ReplyDelete
I think I could eat cow's muscles tissue or pork's, even from a petri dish. But eating your own species would be very good way on spreading diseases.
And I have never understood why it is ok if a wolf kills a sheep and eats it, but if a man does the same, it is suddenly mean and cruel thing to do.
I wouldn't have any moral problem with eating animal tissues grown in the lab, it's just that I don't believe it's healthy for us in any way. Heck, nowadays we are all told how biological and free-ranged animal products are the best, then the same folks turn around and suggest we eat a hamburger grown in a lab with who knows what chemicals inside. A sure way to get cancer, that is. Let the scientists and their families eat it. I also haven't noticed any shortage of cheap hamburgers where I live so I don't get why we should be eating artificial ones.ReplyDelete
At least our 'cannibalism' is only symbolic... ;)ReplyDelete