If a "Museum" is a Muse-house, or a place to store and display objects meant to inspire man-thought, I don't understand the objections to this one being established - unless we think that anything less than the Louvre, or without pillars, arches, and marble cannot be a museum.

There's all kinds of museums in the US, from the famous Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, to the less-famous UFO Museum in Roswell, New Mexico. There's even a Menstruation Museum in Maryland, devoted to the plusses and minusses of that biological function.

All have an "agenda" (they would use the word "theme"), and seek to inpire thought on their subject(s). Most were started by individuals or groups, and are run on a non-profit basis. What is different about this one?

If what it inspires is derision, contempt, and a closer reaffirmation of one's own beliefs, I submit that the viewer's/thinker's mind may not be as open to new data as he asserts. One would think that at the very least, a non-believer would find entertainment value, or some appreciation for the presentation.

By golly, that almost qualifies as a rant. Sorry.

Do please go on about how carnivorous behavior relates to the opening of a new museum.