Cannabalism

skaught said:
Actually, I ate norsefires mom last night...
Click to expand...

:spank:

Hey Skaught!!

Have you seen the movie Where the Buffalo Roam based on Hunter S Thompson, with Billy Murray playing him?

I burned it this week and we watched it.
 
shorty_37 said:
:spank:

Hey Skaught!!

Have you seen the movie Where the Buffalo Roam based on Hunter S Thompson, with Billy Murray playing him?

I burned it this week and we watched it.
Click to expand...

Yeah I saw it. Didn't care for it. Its worth seeing though.
 
skaught said:
Well, even if it is an alternative to world hunger, ITS NOT HEALTHY! It wouldn't work. Moral or immoral, ethical or unethical, Its not an option to use humans to feed humans. Sickness and disease would be widespread.
Click to expand...

But it's purely a question of morality, and possibly, ethics.


Let's assume it was just like eating chicken or beef, is it moral?
 
I wonder what human flesh tastes like....
Also what part would you start eating first??
 
Assuming it could be done with minimal health risks (comparable to every other animal we eat).. sure. Why not? We - depending on the culture you live in - eat cows, dogs, horses, pigs, various birds, reptiles, insects, seafood, etc. If we can send cows to a slaughterhouse, the least we can do is munch on some of our dead brethren!

We could revitalize our penal system & combine it with the meat-packing industry! Plus, we'd probably need to use some of KFC's mechanical separators. I've long been a fan of eating the recently-deceased. That.. sounded creepier than I intended. Aheh.
 
Norsefire said:
Is it moral? If so, why? If not, why not?

Of course, this is assuming that the people eaten died of natural causes

So don't bring murder or something into this. If a person dies of natural causes, is it moral to eat him or her?


From a liberal point of view, they of course think it's perfectly acceptable.

Nobody is being harmed, and all that nonsense


But for us normal people, do you think it's moral?
Click to expand...

Prrsonally I only believe in one universal moral standard. "If it is necessary, it becomes moral." I would eat human flesh if I absolutely had to.
 
Anyone remember Soylant Green?

"Soylent Green is a 1973 dystopian science fiction movie depicting a future in which overpopulation, pollution, and the resulting severe damage to the environment have led to widespread unemployment and poverty. Real fruit, vegetables, and meat are rare, commodities are expensive, and much of the population survives on processed food rations, including "soylent green" wafers."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green

So if we eat others that are "processed" would that be more appealing to everyone?:scratchin:
 
Warlexco said:
Assuming it could be done with minimal health risks (comparable to every other animal we eat).. sure. Why not? We - depending on the culture you live in - eat cows, dogs, horses, pigs, various birds, reptiles, insects, seafood, etc. If we can send cows to a slaughterhouse, the least we can do is munch on some of our dead brethren! .....
Click to expand...

I agree. If its done in a sanitary manner, why would anyone care? :shrug: Its all meat.
I don't know if I could do it myself, but if we had been on that plane crash in the Andes and my children were starving, I would have fed them human flesh. I would even have left strict instructions that in case of my death, I was to be eaten.
 
shorty_37 said:
I wonder what human flesh tastes like....
Also what part would you start eating first??
Click to expand...

Suppose to tast like pork, that is why the Natives in the south pacific called it long pig.

The human being (also referred to throughout culinary history as "long pig" and "hairless goat" in the case of younger specimens) is not generally thought of as a staple food source. Observing the anatomy and skeleton, one can see that the animal is neither built nor bred for its meat, and as such will not provide nearly as much flesh as a pig or cow (for example, an average 1000 pound steer breaks down to provide 432 pounds of saleable beef). The large central pelvis and broad shoulder blades also interfere with achieving perfect cuts. There are advantages to this however, especially due to the fact that the typical specimen will weigh between 100-200 pounds, easily manipulated by one person with sufficient leverage.

Here the caution in choosing your meal must be mentioned. It is VERY IMPORTANT to remember that animals raised for slaughter are kept in tightly controlled environments with their health and diet carefully maintained. Humans are not. Thus not only is the meat of each person of varying quality, but people are also subject to an enormous range of diseases, infections, chemical imbalances, and poisonous bad habits, all typically increasing with age. Also as an animal ages, the meat loses its tenderness, becoming tough and stringy. No farm animal is ever allowed to age for thirty years. Six to thirteen months old is a more common slaughtering point. You will obviously want a youthful but mature physically fit human in apparently good health. A certain amount of fat is desirable as "marbling" to add a juicy, flavorful quality to the meat. We personally prefer firm caucasian females in their early twenties. These are "ripe". But tastes vary, and it is a very large herd.
Click to expand...
 
skaught said:
A friend of mine had to have his leg amputated. He kept it so he could have a barbecue and see what it tastes like. It's still on ice though, we're all waiting for the big day.
Click to expand...

Hahaha. Are you going to have some? :D

Norsefire, can I ask you something? Why are you so intensely against homosexuality, but not cannibalism?
 
I am against cannabalism! I don't think I could eat another person, it just sounds sick, and it doesn't give them the respect they deserve. That being said, I'd eat alot of things, rabbit, dear, even snake, but not people. Or any primates, for that matter.
 
skaught said:
Well, even if it is an alternative to world hunger, ITS NOT HEALTHY! It wouldn't work. Moral or immoral, ethical or unethical, Its not an option to use humans to feed humans. Sickness and disease would be widespread.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the kuru/cjd is only caught through cannibals eating cannibals so you would need a divide of who was allowed to eat man-meat and who wasn't,those not eating it would be the food...but it would use so much food feeding the people you are going to eat that you might as well eat the food you are feeding them...its not a vaible alternative to world hunger
 
shorty_37 said:
I wonder what human flesh tastes like....
Also what part would you start eating first??
Click to expand...

The flank (meat around and in between the ribs) would be the best part to eat.

skaught said:
I'd start with the ass. Apparently, it is the mosty tender.
Click to expand...

Did you ever eat rump roast? It’s like eating a slice of leather. I prefer rib steaks and fillet mignon. And just so we are clear. I am talking about beef, not humans.
 
Kadark said:
Of course cannibalism is immoral. It's a disgusting practice exhibited by savage members within uncivilized cultures. Certainly, no civilized community would welcome such a beastly concept, for a variety of indisputable reasons.

Kadark the Fiery
Click to expand...

And the way that your religion advocates, to slaughter animals, and stone people to death, and slaughter them in other ways, cut off limbs (not sure about the last one though) is not disgusting? and thus immoral, according to your analogy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top