Legalize Cannibalism

[Arawn-ap-Hywel]

It sounds like the solution to my question about disposing of my corpse.

Perhaps if no medical reasons prevent it and taking note of Captian Cardio and SolyentGreens' commets on kuru disease, thus willing my brain be removed first

I shall will the diposal my corpse as a canabalisitic offering
to be first marinated with red wine, chillies and tomatoes, before being slowly spit roats over hickory logs
then fed to a very select group 100 girls aged between twenty and thirty of average weight, who must come to the feast having staved for a day and prepared to enjoy their food by tucking in only with their mouths and wearing no clothes


(Oh was that a dream from the other night )

[SoylentGreen]

can i watch?

[Jubloz]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer There is nothing wrong with eating another dead human being if he or she: -Gives prior permission -Is not crime scene evidence Laws should not be created just because some people think it's gross.

Are we talking about people giving consent to be killed and then eaten, or simply being eaten after a natural death? Because how I go about the topic largely depends on which we're talking about.

[The Bacon Guy]

Quote by: Tiny Gosh, so if a guy wishes to murder me and does so and when he's arrested for my murder, all he has to do is to say I consented to being murdered, right?

No, you would need explicit written consent from the person in question before you take their life. It’s not an alien concept in our legal system: someone who is owed money would need proof of this before taking it. He couldn't just take the money on the premise that it can't be proved that he wasn't owed it. He would have to prove that he was entitled to it; just as you would have to prove that the person you killed gave his life to you.

Anyway, this is off-topic. This thread is about cannibalism; not consensual death.

[Technosoul]

Eating humans is unlawful? If you go to the hospital and get some donated blood that is the same as consuming another person into your system, or even a organ transplant is simular to cannabalism. The only difference is we do not eat the organ with our mouth.

So I guess eating human beings under the conditions stated would be okay if the public were trained to accept it as not being gross. But labeled propery... I personally do not want to buy a taco and find out it was someone's Grandmother.

The thing is about showing some respect for human beings, to continue the belief that were are more important then just being meat, better then the cows and chickens.

Now prepare for something some find gross ....

Ready?

Giving a blow job is cannabalism, is it not?

Now back in the days of Captian Hook the south Amreican cannables did it for religious reasons. Not because off hungar. If they had to kill someone in another tribe to revenge a murdere they would eat the person, out of respect for their spirit, they felt that their spirit would then be able to live on in them. And so being, murder was not really murder.

If that was our religious sense of morality then President Bush would have enough humburgers to last forever. hum(an)burger instead of hamburgers.. did not miss-spell.

As they say in Valley Girl talk "well, barf me out, I mean this is rad."

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Jubloz Are we talking about people giving consent to be killed and then eaten, or simply being eaten after a natural death? Because how I go about the topic largely depends on which we're talking about.

Well, for now since suicide is illegal, let's go with natural death then donated to cannibalism.

[Jubloz]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer Well, for now since suicide is illegal, let's go with natural death then donated to cannibalism.

Ahh, in which case I see no reason to prohibit it, although I have absolutely no interest in partaking in it. If, in someone's will, they pre-approve their remains being consumed as an alternative burial option, that's their choice. I think that a forensic should legally be required to examine the body prior to consumption to prevent murderers from, well, consuming the evidence, but after the examination I don't see a reason why the body couldn't be released to an individual in the dead's will.

[tinybear]

Quote by: Jubloz Ahh, in which case I see no reason to prohibit it, although I have absolutely no interest in partaking in it. If, in someone's will, they pre-approve their remains being consumed as an alternative burial option, that's their choice. I think that a forensic should legally be required to examine the body prior to consumption to prevent murderers from, well, consuming the evidence, but after the examination I don't see a reason why the body couldn't be released to an individual in the dead's will.

How about for the simple reason that it's gross?

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: tinybear How about for the simple reason that it's gross?

Your gross.


No, I'm serious. I think it's gross that people like you are making laws like this cause you think it's icky. It's so narrow minded. Let's ban fat chicks from having sex while we're at it! Christ..

[Jubloz]

Also, I really do highly recommend the book "Stiff" by Mary Roach. It's an extremely well written, and even funny, book about what happens to us after we die and what is done with our bodies. I imagine most of you are probably as ignorant as I was to what happens after we die and what is done with our bodies. For example, are you planning on donating your body to science? Well, your body might not actually be going where you imagine it. Plastic surgery is practices on body part, including on the face of heads that are placed on platters for the plastic surgeons, being used as a crash test dummie or in ballistics tests for the military, etc. One example that I find especially offensive is that some cadavers, the remains of people who have donated their bodies to science, have been crucified for the purpose of seeing what it was like for Jesus.

[tinybear]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer Your gross. No, I'm serious. I think it's gross that people like you are making laws like this cause you think it's icky. It's so narrow minded. Let's ban fat chicks from having sex while we're at it! Christ..

We don't need to ban that. It's common knowledge fat chicks don't get to have sex anyway.

But seriously, you have to accept that certain activities are banned for the plain and simple reason that they are considered gross by the majority of the community.

[Jubloz]

Quote by: tinybear How about for the simple reason that it's gross?

You know what? I agree. I do find it gross. That's also my ethnocentrism speaking, something I really can't help. If it doesn't hurt anyone I hardly see the need to prohibit it simply based on my own cultural biases, however. Why should I impose my emic opinions on others simply because I myself would not want to engage in the act? A lot of people seem to protest homosexuality, along with a myriad of other politicized topics, with this sort of agenda, and I don't understand it. As an example, if participating in homosexuality is distasteful and undesirable for you personally, does that mean that it's wrong for others to engage in by choice? The answer is, of course, no.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: tinybear But seriously, you have to accept that certain activities are banned for the plain and simple reason that they are considered gross by the majority of the community.

The majority of the community think fat chicks having sex is gross. Why are you ignoring that?

[Jubloz]

Quote by: tinybear We don't need to ban that. It's common knowledge fat chicks don't get to have sex anyway. But seriously, you have to accept that certain activities are banned for the plain and simple reason that they are considered gross by the majority of the community.

That's actually a fallacy; appeal to popularity. Simply because most people feel a certain thing is correct or incorrect does not make it so. The American majority once found sex between a white and a black person to be foul, yet there were some who didn't simply conform to those social standards and today it's considered socially acceptable in most parts of the US.

[tinybear]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer The majority of the community think fat chicks having sex is gross. Why are you ignoring that?

They do? :eek:

[tinybear]

Quote by: Jubloz That's actually a fallacy; appeal to popularity. Simply because most people feel a certain thing is correct or incorrect does not make it so. The American majority once found sex between a white and a black person to be foul, yet there were some who didn't simply conform to those social standards and today it's considered socially acceptable in most parts of the US.

Yeah, laws frequently reflect the prevailing social mores. As these change, the law changes along with them. For example, homosexuality was once considered gross and was made a crime. The prevailing views on homosexuality changed and so did the law.

[Jubloz]

Quote by: tinybear Yeah, laws frequently reflect the prevailing social mores. As these change, the law changes along with them. For example, homosexuality was once considered gross and was made a crime. The prevailing views on homosexuality changed and so did the law.

Uhh, not necessarily true. Homosexual marriage is still prohibited for the same reasons that homosexuality is shunned. Laws are also sometimes passed when the opinion's of the majority differ, and the formulation of new laws are sometimes ignored despite that the majority feel a new law is needed. Furthermore, your logic is flawed. You're basically saying that law should reflect popularity and that popularity should determine whether or not to advocate something. Please present an argument, simply saying that "most people find is gross" isn't sufficient.

[Jubloz]

Quote by: tinybear They do? :eek:

Yeah, it's a cultural norm. Welcome to the US.

[tinybear]

Quote by: Jubloz Uhh, not necessarily true. Homosexual marriage is still prohibited for the same reasons that homosexuality is shunned. Laws are also sometimes passed when the opinion's of the majority differ, and the formulation of new laws are sometimes ignored despite that the majority feel a new law is needed. Furthermore, your logic is flawed. You're basically saying that law should reflect popularity and that popularity should determine whether or not to advocate something. Please present an argument, simply saying that "most people find is gross" isn't sufficient.

Social norms take time to change. See, first homosexuality was viewed as repugnant even between consenting adults in private and criminalized. Then the attitude changed and it was considered OK provided it was between consenting adults in private. However, the prevailing attitude has not evolved to the point where the institution of marriage should include same sex unions. I'm pretty sure it will be the accepted norm someday; but not just yet.

[tinybear]

Quote by: Jubloz Yeah, it's a cultural norm. Welcome to the US.

No it's not. If it is, then over 50% of the female population in the US would probably be banned from having sex.