It doesn’t take much to excite Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else. Look what he just posted at Answers in Genesis (AIG), his creationist ministry: Richard Dawkins: “Could We Overcome Our Taboo Against Cannibalism?”
You know who Richard Dawkins is. Hambo has ranted about him before — see, for example, Ken Ham Criticizes Richard Dawkins. Here are some excerpts from Hambo’s new post, with bold font added by us for emphasis:
Atheist Richard Dawkins is well-known for stirring the pot over at Twitter with his inflammatory tweets. He usually gets a largely negative reaction, with people alarmed or disgusted by what he says. But what they fail to realize is that Dawkins is usually being consistent with his atheistic worldview. And that’s the case yet again with his latest tweet, “Could we overcome our taboo against cannibalism?”
We don’t have access to Twitter, but according to Hambo, Dawkins tweeted this:
Tissue culture “clean meat” already in 2018? I’ve long been looking forward to this.https://ind.pn/2F9xAwS [better link later]
What if human meat is grown? Could we overcome our taboo against cannibalism? An interesting test case for consequentialist morality versus “yuck reaction” absolutism.
What’s that all about? It looks like a jocular reaction to something reported three months ago by PhysOrg: Lab-grown meat could let humanity ignore a serious moral failing, which says:
Lab-grown meat is being hailed as the solution to the factory farming of animals. The downside of factory farming for the cows, chickens and pigs themselves is obvious enough. But it is also bad for human health, given the amount of antibiotics pumped into the animals, as well as for the environment, given the resources required to provide us with industrial quantities of meat. By contrast, lab-grown meat need have none of these costs. Once the technology is perfected it will be indistinguishable in taste and texture from real meat, and will be cheaper to produce and purchase.
There is, however, a major problem with lab-grown meat: a moral problem. Factory farming causes billions of animals to live and die in great pain each year. Our response has been almost total indifference and inaction and, despite the rise of vegetarianism and veganism in some quarters, more animals are killed today for food than ever before. This does not reflect well on us, morally speaking, and history will not remember us kindly. The moral problem stems from the fact that we will likely switch over to lab-grown meat because it is cheap, or thanks to its benefits for human health or the environment. That is, we will do it for our own sake and not for the sake of animals.
They go on and on about that “moral problem,” but doesn’t impress us much, and it’s not what Hambo is ranting about. He says:
Dawkins was responding to a news article [It’s the link in his tweet: Lab-grown ‘clean’ meat could be on sale by end of 2018, says producer] about meat grown in a laboratory, referred to as “clean meat.” This meat is grown from stem cells harvested via biopsy from living livestock. But Dawkins took this idea in a whole new direction when he suggested we could grow and consume human meat. In their comments, many people dismissed Dawkins’ statements as disgusting, though a surprising number agreed with him (some people even suggested eating young-earth creationists over their cat). Others tried to explain away his thoughts by appealing to health or cultural reasons.
Okay, so Dawkins made a joke about lab-grown human meat — which wasn’t mentioned in that article. So what? Hambo tells us:
But Dawkins is being utterly consistent with his beliefs. He believes we’re all products of millions of years of evolution. He believes we’re just animals, really no different from cows, sheep, or pigs. So if we eat those creatures, why not eat human “meat” too? Especially if you don’t actually have to kill a human in order to harvest the “meat.”
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! According to Hambo, Dawkins is serious because all evolutionists are cannibals, doncha know? He continues:
But, really, in his worldview, why should we care if we kill human “animals”? From an atheistic worldview, ultimately there’s no purpose or meaning in life.
Hambo, on the other hand, is a creationist, which means his beliefs are The Truth™. The bible tells him that cannibalism is wrong. Without that guidance, like Dawkins, he wouldn’t have a clue. He continues:
Now such an idea is repugnant to most people — and for good reason! We intuitively know humans are different from animals. And that’s because we are. We were made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). We’re not animals — we’re unique and hold a special value simply because we’re made in the image of God. No animals were made in God’s image; therefore we aren’t “meat,” and our muscle was not created to be eaten.
Actually, we are meat. There are plenty of predator species out there that traditionally hunted and devoured humans — and still do when they get the chance. Where does Hambo think they came from? Anyway, he righteously concludes:
Secularists really don’t have a good moral argument against Dawkins’ disgusting statements. But when we start with God’s Word, we are able to authoritatively declare that his idea is morally wrong.
Well, dear reader, you have a problem. When the evolutionists start marketing lab-grown human beef, whatcha gonna do?
Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.