Why is cannibalism morally wrong?

[Craterloads]

In a weird way I guess a religious perspective should care little what happens to a body once the 'soul' is no longer there.

Incorrect, in Islam it is believed the body feels everything after death and it is recommended to handle the body with care. Autopsies are a major issue because of this fact. I would assume other Abrahamic faiths share a similar view regarding the dead, so on a whole simply incorrect.

 

[Craterloads]

Yet you seem to be suggesting that you cannot determine that without some kind of external authority...Allah and the Qu'ran in your case.

You are saying that other people's reasons are insufficient and are not fully reasoned or based on flawed concepts, without explaining your own, what reasoning do you have?

No not at all, i never stated such and i don’t believe that to be the case. Just interested, like i said earlier, in hearing people's actual opinions on the matter after we get past "it's weird" and the justications that are not justifications when broken down. Also i saw a similarity in attitudes towards homosexual relationships and its justifications as similar to that, that can be made for incestual relationships. The whole "if it isn’t hurting anyone one, who cares" should apply in both cases.

My own opinion on the matter, as I have all ready stated, i find both morally wrong because of my religion.

 

[Craterloads]

I doubt most people have really considered it, and just conform to the cultural ethics they are born into. I am increasingly of the opinion that cannibalism is generally wrong, but can be justified depending upon the circumstances, in the same way killing can be.


How does your religion justify it being morally wrong?

Dont know, simply says it is.

 

[Craterloads]

I doubt most people have really considered it, and just conform to the cultural ethics they are born into. I am increasingly of the opinion that cannibalism is generally wrong, but can be justified depending upon the circumstances, in the same way killing can be. Incest, I am not sure can even be objectively justified or condemned purely on ethics, again I think it is contextual. Homosexuality I feel is simply not comparable to either Incest or Cannibalism.

I find the way homosexuality is justified is similar to that of why incest could be justified given the right circumstances. For example

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-557600/Father-daughter-baby-30-year-separation.html

Who can really justify the above is wrong?


Cannibalism is not related to incest or homosexuality so is not comparable and is a seperate issue.

 

[Craterloads]

If I may, I will give you the words of Dr Shehzad Saleem, an Islamic Scholar with the Al-Mawrid Foundation.

Question:
I would be grateful if you could enlighten us on the subject of cannibalism and Islam.

Answer:

Islam has not made a comprehensive list of edibles which are prohibited to consume simply because human nature (if not perverted) instinctively knows what to eat and what not to eat. The innate guidance Islam provides human beings in this regard is enough to show them the way. As per this inborn instinctive guidance eating human flesh is something which is a detestable and abhorrent practice.


According then to Dr Saleem, Humans have an inborn instinctive natural abhorrence to eating Human Flesh. We simply innately know it is wrong......well, that would surely apply to all Human Beings, not only Muslims, I mean a Muslim is not another species after all.

So your justification applies to everyone, regardless of whether they are religious.

Maybe, we believe god provided animals and certain animals on this planet for consumption. That didnt include humans.

Plus i dont know who that guy is or how it reflects on people who are not followers of islam. But the above of being provided certain animals is point enough.

Do you not think it is incumbent on you to find out how your morality is justified through your religion?

As the saying goes, God knows best.

 

[Craterloads]

A: we don't know exactly why the baby died. Could well be from a variety of normal reasons. B: if the proper precautions were taken we wouldn't have this issue. As mentioned earlier the taboo surrounding the matter may have hindered proper medical care and preventative measures. Just jumping to conclusions as it stands.

Well the same answers given to people who say homosexuality is wrong can be used to justify why incest isn't wrong.

 

[Craterloads]

I'm glad ur lumping us all together I don't know who that guy is no one respectable would have a designer beard. It's just some guy on the Internet. I'm of the belief that human meat cannot be consumed under any situation, including that of for survival. That's my belief, key word being my. And no cannot see the link between what my religion states and your personal beliefs.

 

[Craterloads]

On the subject of people just thinking what religion tells them;



And then you come out with;





Simple minde obedience to a religious text and you have the gall to just dismiss other people's thought out reservations as pointless?

Never said my view was great, that doesnt mean the holes in yours are not apparent, which was being discussed.

 

[Craterloads]

Asides from Dr Saleem (I linked all his qualifications btw) I have also supplied judgements from Islamic Jurists such as Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Idris al-Shafi‘i and Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi, the former is considered to be the founder of Islamic Jurispudence.


So it is your personal belief, not one informed by your religion definitively?

Cas, you can post all the links to who ever you want. I told you my belief is based of my religion. Not what some guy says on the internet.

 

[Craterloads]

Your religion is?

I'm sure you are aware?

 

[Craterloads]

del

 

[Craterloads]

For example when opponents of homosexuality point out homosexuality is not normal or natural.

The typical answer you get is, homosexuality is practiced in the animal world? so is natural.

Something i found hypocritical from todays discussion with RDM was

There are very few mammals that practice cannibalism on a regular basis because of the health risks and the fact that it isn't all that good for survival of the species

He is perfectly willing to dismiss cannibalism as unnatural because as he says "isn't all that good for survival of the species" yet is willing to accept homosexuality which again isnt, just like cannibalism, isn't practiced that much because it "isn't all that good for survival of the species"

Do you see what i mean? That is what i was getting at when i said the same answers that can be used to defend homosexuality can be used for cannibalism, and i find it hyprotical if you support one and not the other (more so with incest however). There are many similar quotes and hypocrisies i could highlight from todays debate.

The same goes for some reasoning why incest is not natural etc

 

[Craterloads]

Of course, that is why I referenced some of the sources that are authoritative in Islam. Al Shafi, Al Arabi and I am not saying the Qu'ran advocates Cannibalism, I am saying that the question has been asked many times and the answers from even the greatest of Islamic Scholars and Jurists is inconsistant. So while you can, quite rightly, use your interpretation of your religion to justify your belief (although I would have thought you would know why), there are others who justify a contradictory belief (at least as far as Dhuroora is concerned) using the same source religion.

What are your thoughts on the objective moral nature of Cannibalism given that information?

I dont know who these scolars are, they are just people on the internet. I dont know what that text is, simply just words on the internet. Sorry for being so vague, but i could google just about anything that is forbidden in Islam and find answers claiming otherwise from any random joes.

I have told you i believe under no circumstance can you eat human meat, pigs (or any animal for that matter) yes if your starving, human meat never.

Furthermore the Quran doesnt have all the answers, simply more important matters. Much is also derived from hadith.

 

[Craterloads]

The links explain who they are, they are not random people on the Internet (they have been dead for centuries).

They are among those who formed the Islamic Schools of Jurisprudence, the Shafi'i School of Figh for example is one of four schools of Madhhab and his framework formed the basis for Sharia Law in Sunni Islam.

Genuinely i dont know who they are, i know and have told you what i believe though.

 

[Craterloads]

I see what you mean, and this is why I am still unsure on the application of moral consideration in regard of incest and the ethical relativism of Cannibalism, I still think it is something that is more related to cultural and societal beliefs and taboos than being applicable to objective morality. This is what I was attempting to explain much early in the thread.

As for homosexuality, again I don't think it is a question of morality, but of custom. If the survival of the human race was impacted in any significant way then I may have a different opinion, but I do not think that homosexuality is currently comparable with either Cannibalism or Incest in regards to relative harm, either to the individual or to humanity at large.

Incest isnt going to impact the survival of the human race and niether is homosexuality.

You could say homosexuality is practiced in the natural world, yes so is incest.

You could say can have healthy children, yes so can these guys with the same methods used by same sex couples

You could say "as long as its not hurting anybody" you could say the same of these two as long as they are consenting.

As long as they love each other, yep

It's disgusting weird i hear you say, well don’t look then. Applies for both.

Aeroplanes are unnatural, yet you use them

Spreads aids (disease) where a condom, yep so can they

if everyone was gay we would be extinct, well not everyone’s gay or we can reproduce in other ways

Any other reason could be applied.

Anyhow tittering on a whole different topic, so best i stop.

 

[Craterloads]

I understand and accept what you believe, I was pointing out however that it is not that far removed from what others have been saying when they use justifications for their beliefs.

Difference being i felt they were reactionary positions that were technically incorrect. I suppose you could use my same logic that i'm applying to everyone elses rational and apply it to religion *if religion provided reasoning* sometimes it doesnt though, and can be a matter of "god knows best" but i get what your saying. For example if in a religious book states "it's not allowed because it's bad for the babies health" then one could use my line of reasoning and say well given todays tech, we could eliminate that possibilty.

I am surprised that you don't know some of those people were however, particularly Al Shafi'i and Abu Dawood particularly in relation to Islamic Law which you are using to inform your beliefs...I thought you were a Sunni, maybe I was mistaken.

Well i'm not very religous shall we say, i pray but that is about it right now.

 

[Craterloads]

I think this goes back to what I feel most people do in regards to such questions, they simply rely on tradition, culture and legislation...they rarely go beyond that to justify what they think about questions on subjects that don't affect them directly, such as cannibalism. Sometimes it is a matter of just because we can do a thing, doesn't mean we should do a thing.

I get, it's not something people would put much thought into, hence the thread and people actually did put some thought into it. As far as I’m concerned though i don’t think there was anything said that was rational. Whilst people may fall onto tradition or culture if you asked them randomly on the street, fair enough. This isn’t the case and people have had the time to think about and come with their own reasons, which i find comparative to what people use to justify their opposition to homosexuality.