Richard Dawkins claims we should eat lab-grown human meat

[Catholic_Lady]

Well I thought C2 might be implying that I didn't believe it, so that's why I said that. Wanted to clarify.

I don't doubt you do believe it. I'm just mystified that people can read a pretty obvious metaphor and mistake it for something else.

We concede that it isn't a concept we have the mental capacity to understand, in the same way an ant doesnt have the brain to understand math. That's why we call it a mystery, as you said. The communion host still looks, tastes, and smells like bread, and is processed in our bodies like bread. But we belive that in some way that we can't grasp, God is present there.

---

I'm not sure what the point is in getting humans used to eating other humans. It shouldn't become necessary for humans to eat other humans in order to survive.(at least on a large scale) I don't really see anything morally wrong with eating other humans (but not murdering them) when you are starving. There's no consciousness there. It's just a carcass. I'm sure I would refuse or gag though.

Part of me wonders if he was slightly trolling to get a rise out of people. I find it hard to believe he genuinely feels as though eating dead people shouldn't be taboo, especially considering it can be dangerous/unhealthy.

[brewer]

Does or does not catholicism state that bread and wine become the literal flesh and blood of human being . Which is then consumed ?

..In the physical form of bread and wine. This in no way means we think it is ethical or healthy to eat dead people. The Church is actually against such practice unless in cases of life and death.

No red wings for you then.

[Crossless2.0]

I don't doubt you do believe it. I'm just mystified that people can read a pretty obvious metaphor and mistake it for something else.

We concede that it isn't a concept we have the mental capacity to understand, in the same way an ant doesnt have the brain to understand math.

Not in the same way. Not at all in the same way. But I recognize the Bible as a human, all-too human, artifact. You think it's divinely inspired because, you know, it says so. Lol

That's why we call it a mystery, as you said

Actually, I said no such thing. I did say that I'm mystified how anyone can believe this or fail to see Jesus' words as anything other than metaphors to guide remembrance. Two cheers for the Protestants, I guess.

The communion host still looks, tastes, and smells like bread, and is processed in our bodies like bread. But we belive that in some way that we can't grasp, God is present there.

That's surprising, given his alleged omnipresence.

Presumably, he would be present whether you believe in transubstantiation or not, right?

[Catholic_Lady]

We concede that it isn't a concept we have the mental capacity to understand, in the same way an ant doesnt have the brain to understand math.

Not in the same way. Not at all in the same way. But I recognize the Bible as a human, all-too human, artifact. You think it's divinely inspired because, you know, it says so. Lol

That's why we call it a mystery, as you said

Actually, I said no such thing. I did say that I'm mystified how anyone can believe this or fail to see Jesus' words as anything other than metaphors to guide remembrance. Two cheers for the Protestants, I guess.

The communion host still looks, tastes, and smells like bread, and is processed in our bodies like bread. But we belive that in some way that we can't grasp, God is present there.

That's surprising, given his alleged omnipresence.

Presumably, he would be present whether you believe in transubstantiation or not, right?

Sorry, I thought you mentioned that we call it a mystery on the previous page.

As for your question, yes, we believe He is present everywhere, but when it comes to the Eucharist, we believe He is present there in a different, much more involved sort of way. That's why I explained it as "in a way we cant fully understand."

[rskovride]

 I don't want to fuck my sister and I don't want to eat human meat or cloned human meat, even if criminal murder is not involved.

But what if it was a clone of your sister?






*Disclaimer - Its a joke, no need to get all steanmed up.*

[The Industrial Atheist]

I don't doubt you do believe it. I'm just mystified that people can read a pretty obvious metaphor and mistake it for something else.

We concede that it isn't a concept we have the mental capacity to understand, in the same way an ant doesnt have the brain to understand math. That's why we call it a mystery, as you said. The communion host still looks, tastes, and smells like bread, and is processed in our bodies like bread. But we belive that in some way that we can't grasp, God is present there.

---

I'm not sure what the point is in getting humans used to eating other humans. It shouldn't become necessary for humans to eat other humans in order to survive.(at least on a large scale) I don't really see anything morally wrong with eating other humans (but not murdering them) when you are starving. There's no consciousness there. It's just  a carcass. I'm sure I would refuse or gag though.

Part of me wonders if he was slightly trolling to get a rise out of people. I find it hard to believe he genuinely feels as though eating dead people shouldn't be taboo, especially considering it can be dangerous/unhealthy.

IDK how growing meat in test tubes works, but if metabolism comes into play I also doubt human meat would be the most efficient way to go. It seems like we have to eat quite a bit and aren't all that muscular to produce the largest amounts of meat.

I would say if you thoroughly cooked human meat you greatly reduce the risk of disease. But I have no desire to rely on any sort of human meat for food. I think when people have been shunned for eating human meat when absolutely necessary to survive and without murder, that's unfair. 

Yeah maybe he's trolling a little, though.

[The Grand Nudger]

@emjay
That's alot of thought.  ;  

It's a powerful and compelling taboo, isn't it?

[vorlon13]

So that we can eat dead people? Just a wild guess...

I personally would rather keep the taboo and...you know, not eat dead people.

Just wear their skin ?

[vorlon13]

You would only be infected with a prion disease if the human meat was infected. Same as any other contagious disease. Human meat grown in a lab would most likely be free of such pathogens. I like this idea, go full Hannibal Lector guilt free!! You would not even have to go on the lam (pun intended).

So . . .

genetically, who are we talking about eating ??

I'd be picky about it. It would have to be a he, and an attractive one at that.

[chimp3]

You would only be infected with a prion disease if the human meat was infected. Same as any other contagious disease. Human meat grown in a lab would most likely be free of such pathogens. I like this idea, go full Hannibal Lector guilt free!! You would not even have to go on the lam (pun intended).

So . . .

genetically, who are we talking about eating ??

I'd be picky about it.  It would have to be a he, and an attractive one at that.

Wow! That is something to think about! To grow laboratory human meat, would it have to have an xx or xy chromosome combo? Would it be marketed that way? (Man Meat $7.99 lb, Woman Meat $8.99 lb. PETH Friendly! No actual humans were harmed in the production of this sustainable protein source. Oh, also, gluten free!)