Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

**Matt W** · Jun 21, 2007, 03:12 am

Is staying on-topic so hard, tb? :rolleyes:

tinybear · Jun 21, 2007, 04:01 am

Matt, I'm not really off-topic since we're discussing the rationale and basis for banning cannibalism by the use analogies (homosexuality...etc). I would say the ban reflects the current social norm, i.e. cannibalism is repugnant.

SoylentGreen · Jun 21, 2007, 04:06 am

Perhaps if it was presented in a more acceptable form such as wafers.
We could process those to poor to afford a burial and feed them back to the poor and save money of giving them foodstamps.

tinybear · Jun 21, 2007, 05:04 am

Somehow, with a name like Soylent Green, I'd think you'd be in favor of legalizing cannibalism.

Mia · Jun 21, 2007, 07:24 am

Surely there are better reason beyond 'gross' to support laws against cannibalism.

Was there a case about a homeless person being exonerated of the charges because he was starving, or was that a Law an Order episode?

Mia · Jun 21, 2007, 07:32 am

Quote:

Quote by: 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

)

Do you suffer from Vorarephilia? Vorarephilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

tinybear · Jun 21, 2007, 07:35 am

Quote:

Quote by: Mia

Surely there are better reason beyond 'gross' to support laws against cannibalism.

Was there a case about a homeless person being exonerated of the charges because he was starving, or was that a Law an Order episode?

Can you think of any other reason, Mia?

Hunger is not a defense. Never has been. If hunger is a defense then any hungry person and go and rob restaurants, supermarkets, butchers and grocers with impunity.

Kuldeep · Jun 21, 2007, 07:43 am

While on other threads, I advocated for turning whole world vegetarain basically for want of abolishing untimely and meciless killings of various animals. I also argued when people do not eat human flesh, why unneccessarily they kill animals for their own interest. I also pointed our body anatomy is more suitable to vege stuff.

But, here in favor of legalizing cannibalism, I would say there should be no problem. Since, there is no untimely killing. The positive side is lot of food problem would be solved. Lot of rich proteins would get wasted. However, long term health effects from all medical angles are to be analysed, esertaining no severe ill effects are set in.

After all after death there would be no pain. It would be wise to utilize the ready stock, if social and personal feelings could be controlled. I admit the change would not easy at all.

Irony of whole thing is, I do not take even egg. But logically feel thre should not be any problem with legalizing cannibalism as long it does not affect public health and hurt its emotions.

Mia · Jun 21, 2007, 08:04 am

Quote:

Quote by: tinybear

Can you think of any other reason, Mia?

Because it's exceptionally gross?

Jubloz · Jun 21, 2007, 11:44 am

Quote:

Quote by: SoylentGreen

Perhaps if it was presented in a more acceptable form such as wafers.
We could process those to poor to afford a burial and feed them back to the poor and save money of giving them foodstamps.

Wafers seem expensive to make. Why not just but them in a form the meat wouldn't be noticed in, like hot dogs?

Jubloz · Jun 21, 2007, 11:49 am

Quote:

Quote by: tinybear

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

Hmm, I still don't agree. There are some very high standards for women in the US and even obese men can often be very shallow and desire women who look like models while making fun of those who don't. I've heard enough bad looking guys talk about gross looking fatties to know it's the case. Actually, it's not even unusual for me to hear obese women mocking another women for being obese. Weird world. I've gotta admit though, it has 0 appeal to me.

Jubloz · Jun 21, 2007, 12:14 pm

Quote:

Quote by: tinybear

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.

I agree and I do think same sex marriage will be allowed eventually, but it takes people standing up and rooting for change before the social norms follow. This is exactly why your logic isn't a good argument; you're saying something should remain criminal because it disrupts the social norm, while presenting no other reason for protesting it. If appeal to popularity were such a good argument, people wouldn't question counterproductive or unnecessary ideas and therefor the social norms could never change or evolve in any way.

The only other argument presented has been that it's 'gross.' Most Westerners find it completely disgusting to eat cats and dogs, yet we allow for Easterners (a minority) to do so if they choose (so long as they raise it themselves). Such a thing has everything to do with social norms; the Western taste for pork or cow or even meat at all is seen as revolting in some world regions, it's all about societal standards and taboos.

I was really hoping to see some better arguments against cannibalism, I'd rather not play devil's advocate if I don't have to.

tinybear · Jun 21, 2007, 12:40 pm

Advocating change is perfectly OK. Ramming it down the majority's throats is quite another thing. Change has to be gradual and, above all, voluntary. Otherwise, we would be dictated to by the tyranny of the minority.

tinybear · Jun 21, 2007, 12:43 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Jubloz

Hmm, I still don't agree. There are some very high standards for women in the US and even obese men can often be very shallow and desire women who look like models while making fun of those who don't. I've heard enough bad looking guys talk about gross looking fatties to know it's the case. Actually, it's not even unusual for me to hear obese women mocking another women for being obese. Weird world. I've gotta admit though, it has 0 appeal to me.

I think the picture says it all. I have nothing to add.

Jubloz · Jun 21, 2007, 12:44 pm

Quote:

Quote by: tinybear

Advocating change is perfectly OK. Ramming it down the majority's throats is quite another thing.

I don't think anyone was suggesting ramming it down the majority's throats, consumption is to be voluntary.

SoylentGreen · Jun 21, 2007, 02:33 pm

Quote:

[tinybear]
Somehow, with a name like Soylent Green, I'd think you'd be in favor of legalizing cannibalism

.

Your right I think my avitar is starting to effect my mind . Maybe i should change it. I was thinking perhaps tp Norman Bates or even Ed Gein

tinybear · Jun 21, 2007, 02:36 pm

Norman Bates is OUT.

Patrick Bateman is IN.

But in order to keep on-topic and not to incur the wrath of the Great Mod of VC, i.e. one Matt W, I'd have to nominate Hannibal Lecter.

**Matt W** · Jun 21, 2007, 04:12 pm

Hannibal Lecter seems acceptable, indeed. Although if you could find a pic of that German fella who got convicted last year or thereabouts for actually eating someone, that would be even better...

SoylentGreen · Jun 21, 2007, 04:23 pm

So for those who find it just to gross.
What if you were in the old shipwreck scene,5 guys on a lifeboat ,no food or water. First there was 5 then 4 then 3 and so on.
Would you volonteer to be the first or would you draw straws with the rest?

Jubloz · Jun 21, 2007, 07:54 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Matt W

Hannibal Lecter seems acceptable, indeed. Although if you could find a pic of that German fella who got convicted last year or thereabouts for actually eating someone, that would be even better...

Armin? I read a biography on the guy a while back, strange person. His victim had a fetish for being eaten alive and Armin probably would've never been caught if he hadn't looked for more people willing to give up their bodies (he was against eating someone without consent).

Jun 21, 2007, 03:12 am	#41 (permalink) (top)
Matt W Moderator Location: Reading, UK. Posts: 7,191	Is staying on-topic so hard, tb? :rolleyes: I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered. -George Best, on being asked what he did with his footballing fortunes.

Jun 21, 2007, 07:24 am	#45 (permalink) (top)
Mia Retired Posts: 7,312	Surely there are better reason beyond 'gross' to support laws against cannibalism. Was there a case about a homeless person being exonerated of the charges because he was starving, or was that a Law an Order episode? "...with like-minded people one cannot discuss. With like-minded people one can only participate in a church service, and you know how I feel about church services." Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Jun 21, 2007, 07:43 am	#48 (permalink) (top)
Kuldeep Kuldeep Location: Bhopa, M.P, India Posts: 1,713	legalizing cannibalism !!??..Why or why not?? While on other threads, I advocated for turning whole world vegetarain basically for want of abolishing untimely and meciless killings of various animals. I also argued when people do not eat human flesh, why unneccessarily they kill animals for their own interest. I also pointed our body anatomy is more suitable to vege stuff. But, here in favor of legalizing cannibalism, I would say there should be no problem. Since, there is no untimely killing. The positive side is lot of food problem would be solved. Lot of rich proteins would get wasted. However, long term health effects from all medical angles are to be analysed, esertaining no severe ill effects are set in. After all after death there would be no pain. It would be wise to utilize the ready stock, if social and personal feelings could be controlled. I admit the change would not easy at all. Irony of whole thing is, I do not take even egg. But logically feel thre should not be any problem with legalizing cannibalism as long it does not affect public health and hurt its emotions.

Jun 21, 2007, 04:12 pm	#58 (permalink) (top)
Matt W Moderator Location: Reading, UK. Posts: 7,191	Hannibal Lecter seems acceptable, indeed. Although if you could find a pic of that German fella who got convicted last year or thereabouts for actually eating someone, that would be even better... I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered. -George Best, on being asked what he did with his footballing fortunes.

Jun 21, 2007, 04:01 am	#42 (permalink) (top)
tinybear Volcanic Erupter Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 7,327	Matt, I'm not really off-topic since we're discussing the rationale and basis for banning cannibalism by the use analogies (homosexuality...etc). I would say the ban reflects the current social norm, i.e. cannibalism is repugnant.

Jun 21, 2007, 04:06 am	#43 (permalink) (top)
SoylentGreen Volcanic Erupter Posts: 3,390	Perhaps if it was presented in a more acceptable form such as wafers. We could process those to poor to afford a burial and feed them back to the poor and save money of giving them foodstamps.

Jun 21, 2007, 05:04 am	#44 (permalink) (top)
tinybear Volcanic Erupter Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 7,327	Somehow, with a name like Soylent Green, I'd think you'd be in favor of legalizing cannibalism.

Jun 21, 2007, 12:40 pm	#53 (permalink) (top)
tinybear Volcanic Erupter Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 7,327	Advocating change is perfectly OK. Ramming it down the majority's throats is quite another thing. Change has to be gradual and, above all, voluntary. Otherwise, we would be dictated to by the tyranny of the minority.

Jun 21, 2007, 02:36 pm	#57 (permalink) (top)
tinybear Volcanic Erupter Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 7,327	Norman Bates is OUT. Patrick Bateman is IN. But in order to keep on-topic and not to incur the wrath of the Great Mod of VC, i.e. one Matt W, I'd have to nominate Hannibal Lecter.

Jun 21, 2007, 04:23 pm	#59 (permalink) (top)
SoylentGreen Volcanic Erupter Posts: 3,390	So for those who find it just to gross. What if you were in the old shipwreck scene,5 guys on a lifeboat ,no food or water. First there was 5 then 4 then 3 and so on. Would you volonteer to be the first or would you draw straws with the rest?