You wouldn't think that scientists would be out there promoting the practice of cannibalism, but this article in New Scientist suggests otherwise.

Was there some groundbreaking research that would suggest eating another human wasn't a terrible source of nutrition, a source of awful diseases, or just a down right despicable practice that God says is a punishment of sin?

Nope.

Here's the evidence presented:

Ethically, cannibalism poses fewer issues than you might imagine. If a body can be bequeathed with consent to medical science, why can't it be left to feed the hungry? Our aversion has been explained in various ways. Perhaps it is down to the fact that, in Western religious traditions, bodies are seen as the seat of the soul and have a whiff of the sacred. Or maybe it is culturally ingrained, with roots in early modern colonialism, when racist stereotypes of the cannibal were concocted to justify subjugation. These came to represent the 'other' to Western societies - and revulsion towards cannibalism became a tenet of their moral conscience.

That's right. the wokies are stumping for cannibalism.

Christianity and religious colonialists thought cannibalism was evil, and because Christians and Western thought are the antithesis of woke neo-Marxism, whatever they believe must be tossed, even if it kills everyone and we are forced to eat people in the process.

The article also said,

'New archaeological evidence shows that ancient humans ate each other surprisingly often - sometimes for compassionate reasons. The finds give us an opportunity to reassess our views on the practice.'

Evidence sounded promising, so I went exploring. I found another New Scientist article published on the same day as this one with a link to a decade old archeological find of human bones with signs of cannibalism.

IN GOUGH'S cave in Cheddar Gorge, south-west England, archaeologists have found the remains of at least six individuals. Many of the bones were intentionally broken and the fragments are covered in cut marks, the result of people using stone tools to separate them and remove the flesh. What's more, 42 per cent of the bone fragments bear human teeth marks. There is little doubt: the people who lived in this cave 14,700 years ago practised cannibalism.

I'm making the assumption that this is the "new archeological evidence" the first article is referencing, as this one also seems to be championing a cannibalistic revival.

But what happened to bring back this macabre conversation, which had thankfully fallen out of the national consciousness since the pandemic lockdowns ended?

My guess is that it was Idaho lawmakers introducing new anti-cannibalism laws to address fears that human-composting could lead to accidentally ingesting a loved one.

State Rep. Heather Scott of Blanchard, Idaho, introduced the bill that would expand cannibalism laws to outlaw giving someone human flesh to consume, even inadvertently like through a garden with composted remains.

'This is going to be normalized at some point, the way our society's going and the direction we're going,' Scott said.

'I didn't want to see that in my Home Depot stores.'

Left-leaning media mocked her, saying that she presented evidence from a David Spade prank show when submitting the law, which was true.

So, clearly Scott must just be a right-wing nut job because she thought a spoof show was real, but then just a few days later, there are pro-cannibalism articles popping up again in what used to be respectable publications.

Time to pull out your copy of Soylent Green and get yourself a refresher.

[Editor's Note: P.S. 👇]

P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇