Armin Meiwes, a case study

[Wrayun]

So, what stops you from eating another, consenting, human being?

Read the wiki page at your own discretion.



Armin Meiwes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How far can the human psyche go? Is this person a psycho? Is he a killer? After all he had the consent of his partner.

His case is giving German authorities a headache, because of the fact that his "victim" was a willing participant in his own cannibalistic demise.

It belongs in the religion section, because it has everything to do with belief, humanity, morals and ethics.

My question to atheists is, based on what do you judge him, if at all you do?

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Well Wrayun.

Eating another Human is not good because is goes against ones conscience.

What dictates, or rather what should dictate the conscience of what is right and what is wrong?

Eating another Human is no different than killing another Human.

Says? What about a consenting human being? What about Euthanasia?

Religion has killed more Humans than Humans have eaten Humans.

This is categorically wrong. Religion people have suffered more that anyone due to politics. In fact, most of our wars are not religious, religion is just a scape-goat.

We as the godless ones, would object to such things on the grounds that the individual is not sane, just as we do not believe a Fish can consume a Man and a man lives in the Fish's stomach.

My friend, your argument is weak. By definition, it is possible to be in a whales belly. How long or how, it remains for scientists and researchers to figure this out. This example of Hadhrat Yunus, is a branch of knowledge we need to tap.

Here we have a simple case of a deluded individual who needs help. I do not see any role of God here other than Wrayun trying to state that those who do not believe in god must allow this, but its wrong and there are consequences, Lets be traditional, would a sane person like to do a Crap that contains his loved one? No/She would'nt.

What is sanity? The role of God is to dictate what is good and what is bad for us, for He has created us. He does so so that we reach our objective and not live a futile life of trial and error.

Here we have a simple case of a couple who are mentally deluded just as no different than those who Kill another human being in the name of Allah.

Killing another person in the name of Allah is wrong, because He does not allow it. However, fighting the cause of Allah and defending yourself and your beliefs is allowed. Without there being evil the essence of goodness is lost. Darkness is the absence of light.

We will all die the same, but the human conscience develops with time, Wrayun, there was a time when your Arab heros would flatten a village, slaughter the males and keep the females as war booty(case of Rayhana).

Human conscience does not develop. It has been fixed. Prophets (peace be upon them) calibrate our understanding of our conscience. That is what the Prophet (saw) did for the Arabs, and turned their society around within 23 years. If that is not a miracle then what is?

In this time and era, would such a thing be acceptable? would our conscience accept such a event to occur? Well, the case of Rayhana is part of Islam's history and its conquest(Muslim crusades). Does it mean every Muslim should keep kill the males of one tribe and keep their females as war booty? can this happen in the 2010? would you do that Wrayun? where does God come into this? its the Human conscience! it develops with time and changes, in one time, war booty was accepted, the women could not vote, now in the 2010, war booty is prohibited and women can vote.

Religious wars are not the rule, as per Quran, they are the exception. Therefore, it is only allowed in self defense. That said, the laws that dictate the booties of war have to be understood. Are you willing to hear me out on this?

Same with this case, A man was requested by his wife to eat her and he looks like hes accepted her request, this shows he is not mentally stable and shes just plain bonkers! It has nothing to do with what Astists think, because if one looks at it logically, a death is a death, so when you kill or consume another human being, what difference does it make if you kill another human being?

Coming back to the beginning of my rebuttal, what is right and what is wrong? First define this, then we can continue.

[Wrayun]

Well Wrayun.

Eating another Human is not good because is goes against ones conscience.

Eating another Human is no different than killing another Human.

Religion has killed more Humans than Humans have eaten Humans.

We as the godless ones, would object to such things on the grounds that the individual is not sane, just as we do not believe a Fish can consume a Man and a man lives in the Fish's stomach.

Here we have a simple case of a deluded individual who needs help. I do not see any role of God here other than Wrayun trying to state that those who do not believe in god must allow this, but its wrong and there are consequences, Lets be traditional, would a sane person like to do a Crap that contains his loved one? No/She would'nt.

Here we have a simple case of a couple who are mentally deluded just as no different than those who Kill another human being in the name of Allah.

We will all die the same, but the human conscience develops with time, Wrayun, there was a time when your Arab heros would flatten a village, slaughter the males and keep the females as war booty(case of Rayhana).

In this time and era, would such a thing be acceptable? would our conscience accept such a event to occur? Well, the case of Rayhana is part of Islam's history and its conquest(Muslim crusades). Does it mean every Muslim should keep kill the males of one tribe and keep their females as war booty? can this happen in the 2010? would you do that Wrayun? where does God come into this? its the Human conscience! it develops with time and changes, in one time, war booty was accepted, the women could not vote, now in the 2010, war booty is prohibited and women can vote.

Same with this case, A man was requested by his wife to eat her and he looks like hes accepted her request, this shows he is not mentally stable and shes just plain bonkers! It has nothing to do with what Astists think, because if one looks at it logically, a death is a death, so when you kill or consume another human being, what difference does it make if you kill another human being?

MI6,

Beside the fact that your argument is completely absurd, I'm contemplating whether to entertain your queries or not. Sincerely, I don't think you are worth my time. No offense.


I'll wait for another.

[Feroza_Banu]

interesting read. thanks for sharing. i hear about many weird incidents from germany, lately

[AgnosticPashtana]

We non believers think when something immoral happens, we are against it. I don't understand what you want us non believers to say?

[Toramana]

Morality is not due to belief...

[Wrayun]

Agnostica,

Do you as a non-believer think what Armin did was immoral? If yes, please tell how.

Toramana,

Let's agree with that notion. From where do you derive your morality, and how do you view this event based on it?

[AgnosticPashtana]

Agnostica,

Do you as a non-believer think what Armin did was immoral? If yes, please tell how.

Toramana,

Let's agree with that notion. From where do you derive your morality, and how do you view this event based on it?

We judge him based on his action. If he is within the boundaries of German law, he is fine. If not, we will have him go through a series of court hearings.

Do you think morality is a derivative of Religion?

[unknownprince]

no one cares if a non-beleiver is a non-beleiver. Just make sure that they get the message of Islam, and the rest is up to them. No one loses sleep over whether or not someone beleives LOL.

Eating a human entails killing a person to eat, but I guess eating animals is essentially the same right???

I mean animals are Allah's(swt) creation too. Right.

I have tried to limit my intake of meat, and I may soon become a vegetarian. I don't eat cow because I don't understand how the death of a cow can ever be quick. I eat chicken. I also try to refrain myself from lamb because again I don't see how the death can ever be quick.

[Toramana]

it is non-sense saying it is derivative of religion---it is derived from our consciousness and self-awareness and awareness of the external reality...you should not do to others that you can't do to yourself...

Chinese are an example ... they are not doing it for some reward in jannah (e.g. 72 hoors ) or to please some super-natural diety but for its own sake...and I think it is higher morality...

[Wrayun]

We judge him based on his action. If he is within the boundaries of German law, he is fine. If not, we will have him go through a series of court hearings.

Excellent argument, judge according to the law of the state and by the action.

Now in Saudi and Iran, and I believe in other Muslim countries apostates, homosexuals etc. are put to death according to the laws of the state. Do you agree with them, if not, why not? Don't forget what you stated above.

Do you think morality is a derivative of Religion?

The root word for Morals come from the Greek word "customs". Morals are customs, socially relevant, circumstantial and subjective. In other words that what you and I consider morally good or bad are directly influenced by our beliefs. Majority of the world is theistic, whether they believe in one God, or multiple Gods, therefore religion has and does influence morality absolutely. Not all morality might come from religion, but most of it does.

Besides, I'd consider morality in relation to humanity/humanism as a religion of its own kind. Especially if you use it to dictate the cause, purpose and nature of human beings.

[Wrayun]

it is non-sense saying it is derivative of religion---it is derived from our consciousness and self-awareness and awareness of the external reality...you should not do to others that you can't do to yourself...

Chinese are an example ... they are not doing it for some reward in jannah (e.g. 72 hoors ) or to please some super-natural diety but for its own sake...and I think it is higher morality...

Majority of the Chinese are religious, influenced by ancient beliefs that till this day remain strong through out cultural practices. The Chinese never were "atheists", or godless. If they become atheists now, their society has already been conditioned by previous religions like Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, Taoism etc. etc. that thought them moral truths, and right from wrong.

I don't know of any society that didn't believe in supernatural creation, teaching moral truths, purposeful existence, that reached civilization. Is there any?

Atheistic believes can not lead to moral absolutes, it is impossible. Morality, humanism i.e. do on to others as done to you, does not apply in the evolutionary processes of self-preservation, self-interest, survival of the fittest, natural selection etc. etc. as these would dictate our rational (learned behavior, as Darwin put it).

This is something that Friedrich Nietzsche understood and wrote about, in regards to "atheism" and atheistic beliefs. His conclusion was that atheistic absolute morality is impossible, and will eventually lead to moral nihilism.