Saturday, June 2, 2012

More on Waste, I Suppose

   I've had to pick up a lot of slack for Post the Hundredth, in which I guess it sounded like I see no other reasons not to eat people other than it's in bad taste (no pun intended...). Man, endowed with reason from On High, is a sacred animal-- alright. I'm willing to accpet that, as a precept and tenant of faith. Even science has to have faith at its core (such as faith in the existence of, say, existence.) Science observes what's measurable, religion ensures that we believe that there's something that's not.

   But I guess that clarifying that coerces me into delving into the relationship between how I see waste and how I see animals. Which I already did in that post. Delicious meaty meat and textured leathery leather and fuzzy furry fur. You know. There is something else, though, tied to the religion thing up there. I guess I'll talk about that. So, between waste, animals, and religion:

   I really see that as kind of a waste of soul, having animals just live once and then die and then live forever after that. Isn't it? Imagine all of those immortal resurrected souls of, say, flies. Countless trillions and trillions of them, just existing, saved for being flies. Reincarnation would be much more efficient, I think, wouldn't it. They're animals. They don't know right from wrong. Their salvation is irrelevant because it's a given. They don't need to stay in Heaven.

   There's a bit of a problem there with how they'd need a new body each time, since the flesh becomes wedded to the spirit in a sense and taking on a new form, even within the same species, would be a divorcement. I guess we can't take that away from them. So, never mind, I guess?

No comments:

Post a Comment