Human Sacrifice

[anunitu]

Re: Human Sacrifice

In many ways there are alternative forms of sacrifice. It has been something of a thing to send our young men into war,many of these wars were not really needed. I wonder if at times this happens to glen down the pool,so as to elevate those who do not die(and of course the "Elite" who do not go to war)

Not as drastic as killing them yourself,just send them in harms way(and who usually screams for war?,why those never likely to be in the war)


Might also mention Kane and Able...first of the first...and you see where that went..

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Human Sacrifice

Which I imagine is really why this section was split off from the original discussion. I've been involved in a lot of animal sacrifice discussions, and it eventually comes down to 'well if you believe in animal sacrifice then what about humans, huh, huh?'.

It's due to the slippery slope fallacy, I think. People love slippery slopes. Every person who makes a pretense to rational thought should be issued a ice ax and set of caribiners.

The only fallacy more commonly abused is the "appeal to nature" fallacy: A bear poops in the woods, a bear is a part of nature, therefore pooping in the woods is natural. What is natural is good, therefore we should all be out there pooping in the woods.

(watch out for this one. Pagans are especially susceptible to it)

[anunitu]

Re: Human Sacrifice

So,that's what I stepped in while out in nature...fraking bears and hippy pagans...

Almost forgot...sometimes the bears are pooping hippy pagans...(yogi my ass)

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Human Sacrifice

Yup,yup,yup....

Gotta love Bobby (he just did the first interview he's given in 25 years. It was for AARP).

[Medusa]

Re: Human Sacrifice

Is he going to eat the child afterwards? And did he raise and kill it humanely or did he torture it first?

The problem with sacrifice debates is this right here... as in the direction this is going (has gone).

There's a pretty big difference between sacrificing a food animal to your god in a humane manner and eating it afterwards, and torturing a small child to death in the name of your god. They are not the same thing. So why can't we discuss what we're actually talking about when we start talking about sacrifices? Why do we always end up with the dead child scenario?

Because I view humans as another animal on this planet. We do enough using animals for our needs. Now we have to throw our religion across their slit throats? No. I'm still calling complete and utter bullshit. If YOU (not you but the general sacrificing peeps) want to sacrifice something to your god..don't pick anyone other than a practitioner of your god. Don't be dragging the rest of the atheists (because you think animals are theists?) into your nonsense. And yeah. I'm putting down hard words. Because I'm fine with people who believe in things I don't to mind their own way in life. I'm not ok to then dictate that belief on me or other atheists sharing this planet. It bugs me. Because I bet I can't go around taking your cat,loving it, making sure it's fed, then killing it to sacrifice to the dark lord. But it's ok. Because I used the fur as slippers. And I made earrings out of the teeth.

That's why.

[Rae'ya]

Re: Human Sacrifice

It's due to the slippery slope fallacy, I think. People love slippery slopes. Every person who makes a pretense to rational thought should be issued a ice ax and set of caribiners.

The only fallacy more commonly abused is the "appeal to nature" fallacy: A bear poops in the woods, a bear is a part of nature, therefore pooping in the woods is natural. What is natural is good, therefore we should all be out there pooping in the woods.

(watch out for this one. Pagans are especially susceptible to it)

Sometimes the argument is not that we should all be out there pooping in the woods, but that pooping in the woods is a perfectly okay thing to do and that no one should be vilified for choosing to poop in the woods.

Because I view humans as another animal on this planet. We do enough using animals for our needs. Now we have to throw our religion across their slit throats? No. I'm still calling complete and utter bullshit. If YOU (not you but the general sacrificing peeps) want to sacrifice something to your god..don't pick anyone other than a practitioner of your god. Don't be dragging the rest of the atheists (because you think animals are theists?) into your nonsense. And yeah. I'm putting down hard words. Because I'm fine with people who believe in things I don't to mind their own way in life. I'm not ok to then dictate that belief on me or other atheists sharing this planet. It bugs me. Because I bet I can't go around taking your cat,loving it, making sure it's fed, then killing it to sacrifice to the dark lord. But it's ok. Because I used the fur as slippers. And I made earrings out of the teeth.

That's why.

We aren't talking about sacrificing the neighbour's cat to appease the gods. We're talking about killing a chicken (or lamb or calf or goat) in a ritualised offering to the gods, then eating that chicken afterwards.

I'm sure you've eaten chicken a gazillion times. And I'm sure you buy your chicken cheaply at the supermarket. Those chickens were probably raised intensively, and were definitely killed in a commercial slaughterhouse. So please tell me exactly what makes your moral ground any firmer than the person who chooses to raise and kill THEIR chicken dinner themselves, and offer the energy of the death to their chosen deity?

And how exactly is it different to a homesteader who raises and kills their own meat, without making it a respectful and ritualised slaughter?

Back on topic, if you're going to compare animal and human sacrifice, then we should be comparing apples with apples. So yes, compare sacrificing a child with sacrificing the neighbour's cat... but don't compare it with sacrificing a chicken and eating it.

The debate about human sacrifice is certainly a relevant one. But to assume that everyone who is happy to sacrifice a chicken is also happy to sacrifice the neighbour's cat or a small child is completely ridiculous. I am not okay with human sacrifice. I am not okay with sacrificing the neighbour's cat. But I am okay with sacrificing a food animal that is eaten afterwards. And frankly, I think that bringing religion into it makes the act of taking a life a sacred and profound thing, rather than a taboo subject that is hidden under layers of plastic wrap and pre-cut bloodless meat.

I also view humans as another animal on this planet, and to be honest I don't particularly value them any more than I do any other animal. Would I kill one? If they were threatening me or my loved ones and there was no alternative option then yes, I would. I would also euthanise one if asked. Would I eat a human? If I was starving to death, yes. Would I kill one in order to eat it? That depends on the human... I'd starve before I killed a loved one. But I'd possibly kill a stranger for meat before I killed my pet duck for meat. Because Jemima means a great deal more to me than a random stranger on the street. Would I sacrifice a human to my gods? No. Would I sacrifice my pet duck to my gods? No. Would I sacrifice your dog Lexi to my gods? No. Would I sacrifice a chicken that I purchased or raised for the purpose? Yes. Would I raise a kitten for the purpose of sacrificing it to my gods? No. Would I sacrifice a random frog to my gods? No. Would I dedicate the death of the poisonous spider I just squished to my gods? Yes.

Do you see what I'm getting at here? This is not a black and white subject. It's not a subject where the slippery slope fallacy is going to work.

And incidentally... while I have no problem with a humane animal sacrifice that is eaten afterwards... if a vegetarian wanted to sacrifice a chicken and chuck it's carcass in the bin afterwards, I would have something to say about that. I obviously have no problem with killing animals to eat, or killing an animal for offering then eating it (because it's still killing it to eat)... but if you've killed it for a reason other than food, defense or mercy then I am not going to respect you.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Human Sacrifice

Sometimes the argument is not that we should all be out there pooping in the woods, but that pooping in the woods is a perfectly okay thing to do and that no one should be vilified for choosing to poop in the woods.

Oh, I agree. The problem is that small minds have trouble grasping that between black and white are an infinite number of shades of grey, so they tend to go for either black or white. Most of those who come here and stay understand grey. But that is somewhat exceptional in the general population, and often when even rational people debate they tend to polarize.

[Medusa]

Re: Human Sacrifice

What the difference if you know the animal or not? I get your point on relative nature of the animal to the person about to do the killing/sacrifice/eating.

My point is this. Don't involve anything else in your religious system other than those who believe in it.

[Rae'ya]

Re: Human Sacrifice

What the difference if you know the animal or not? I get your point on relative nature of the animal to the person about to do the killing/sacrifice/eating.

I value all life. But I prioritize life based on it's emotional value to myself. Maybe that's a selfish and ego-centric way to view life. But I can't completely stop killing all living things without dying myself, so there has to be SOME prioritization system. Most people prioritize human life over animal life, and pet animal life over livestock animal life, and then have rodents and pests and bugs and plants and things somewhere down the bottom where they don't matter. Not me.

When the zombie apocalypse happens, Noodle and my girls are almost as important to me as my niece and nephew. So I'll throw twenty strangers in front of the zombies if it'll help me keep my family safe (human and otherwise).

My point is this. Don't involve anything else in your religious system other than those who believe in it.

I do kind of agree with this. But I think it's one of those things that is better in theory than it is in practice. We involve people in our religious systems all the time... because our religious systems are a part of our worldview. Your identity as an atheist affects the way that you view the world and treat the people around you, because it's a part of your frame of reference. My religious worldview affects the way I view the world and treat the people around me. So while I agree with the general point that you shouldn't make an animal (or human) pay the price of your offering when it's not their gods... I don't actually think that this statement truly works as a global sentiment. And I don't agree that this is what is being done when a chicken is sacrificed and then eaten.

[Azvanna]

Re: Human Sacrifice

...and often when even rational people debate they tend to polarize.

That has got to be one of the most insightful and succinct phrases I've read on the forum.

[Azvanna]

Re: Human Sacrifice

Don't involve anything else in your religious system other than those who believe in it.

I'm not sure if that's possible, seeing religious systems frame how believers interact with their world.
..........................
Oh sorry, I see Rae'ya beat me to it.

[Medusa]

Re: Human Sacrifice

I'm not sure if that's possible, seeing religious systems frame how believers interact with their world.
..........................
Oh sorry, I see Rae'ya beat me to it.

Well as in don't tell me what to wear or eat or cover because your religion says you have to wear or eat or cover (insert your fetish of the day). Don't involve me with your prejudices against everything in the world because you believe your religion says it's ok to do so. Don't involve me in your morals. Don't involve me in your way of life. There are more atheists on this planet then theists. They don't involve you. So don't involve us.

[Norse_Angel]

Re: Human Sacrifice

Human sacrificing in today's world is a bit far fetched. But in the days of old, it was not an insane mans blunder, it was a way of life, and a way of gracing the gods. Now, in some differing religions and peoples, they would use prisoners of war, criminals, slaves, and those who were thought to be pure (virgins).
Gamla Uppsala was a very sacred place to those of heathen faith in Sweden, and the folk would visit its groves of trees and temples every 9 years to offer gifts to the Gods. 9 of every type of living creation was offered to the gods, their blood dripping from the wounds that brought death rather quickly and painlessly. There were always 9 humans, as well as 9 horses, dogs, lambs, etc. This was a way of life to them. The sacrificing was not brought on by insanity, nor was it malicious. It was a patronage to their deities, and was considered an honor to those who were offered. These men and women were not just slaves, or prisoners, but some were people who willingly gave their lives to the gods.
Human sacrificing is revered today, but, back in those times, was a way of worship.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Human Sacrifice

How nice for them.

I hope they had a jolly time.

[Medusa]

Re: Human Sacrifice

Well I don't think the bear is trying to sacrifice me to their bear god. I'm pretty sure they just either want me to go away or eat me. I won't be forced to be in a world where some theists believe in their creation myth and not the scientifically more accurate way of the world. I can't help them. They just have to get up on the times.

Anyways. I fell asleep watching Nixon/Frost. It's dinner time. I got to go find a pizza to sacrifice.