Cannibalism

Cannibalism
Piramni
Disappeared
Avatar

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Location: Anywhere But Here

Total Topics: 53
Total Posts: 126
#21 - Quote - Permalink
Posted May 21, 2004 - 1:01 AM:

NoctumNerd wrote:
. Instead of donating your body, why don't you donate money and food you don't eat to food banks, it will go a lot further over your life-time of giving food, then your dead body will after you die.


I do give a lot of food to the food banks in needy areas. I started a program at work to take old clothes and winter coats, as well as food to the homeless and destitute downtown. In addition, I volunteer three lunches a week to take hot lunches to elderly people who can't get out much.

I am just trying to figure out if cannibalism is ethical. And if it isn't, why isn't it? Or is it simply a moral issues. I can't find any religious texts forbidding it, just modern laws because of disease.
NoctumNerd
Newbie

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 17, 2004

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 0
#22 - Quote - Permalink
Posted May 21, 2004 - 1:35 AM:

If you did find religious texts forbidding it, would that really clear things up for you? Maybe I read wrong, but I assumed you were an Atheist, so why would religious texts make a difference? Also, if you found out that it wasn't ethically wrong, and your government was in agreement with you, and someone served their Aunt for dinner when you went to their house, would you eat it? Be honest here please, because I really have a hard time believing that you would have absolutely no problem with it.

Btw, I really respect your charitable nature.
Piramni
Disappeared
Avatar

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Location: Anywhere But Here

Total Topics: 53
Total Posts: 126
#23 - Quote - Permalink
Posted May 21, 2004 - 1:49 AM:

I am an Atheist. I was attempting to figure out how it became a taboo in the first place. Most morals have a base in some religious text, and that's why I asked.

I think that if I was invite to someone's home, and they honored me and their aunt by using her body to feed us all I don't think I'd have a problem with that. Of course, I can't know that for sure, as I've never been in that situation. It would be far more noble than eating a cow who was born and raised solely to be food and slaughtered in unspeakable ways. (Not that I have a problem eating cow either, or almost any meat that is free from disease and legal to consume)
Checksum
Newbie

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 15, 2004
Location: California

Total Topics: 7
Total Posts: 2
#24 - Quote - Permalink
Posted May 21, 2004 - 2:42 AM:

I feel that if my dad were to die of some cause, to gut him and cook him would be terribly traumatizing. If we have no problems as a society eating other people, what's to say we won't just walk out the door and gut some stranger for dinner? I mean, in this scenario it's not that different.
NoctumNerd
Newbie

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 17, 2004

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 0
#25 - Quote - Permalink
Posted May 21, 2004 - 2:48 AM:

Checksum wrote:
I feel that if my dad were to die of some cause, to gut him and cook him would be terribly traumatizing. If we have no problems as a society eating other people, what's to say we won't just walk out the door and gut some stranger for dinner? I mean, in this scenario it's not that different.


Well, it is different. One is murdering to eat, one is eating the already dead and empty shell. However I will totally agree with you that it is terribly traumatizing. Piramni, I do not understand your view on this shaking head I guess I am just old fashioned rolling eyes
Piramni
Disappeared
Avatar

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Location: Anywhere But Here

Total Topics: 53
Total Posts: 126
#26 - Quote - Permalink
Posted May 21, 2004 - 10:19 AM:

No no, I'm not saying it's right. And I am not saying that I could definately do it when it came down to it. What I am wondering is why it's so taboo, and where the idea came from. I understand that there was a whole tribe nearly wiped out because of disease and cannibalism, but it seems like it goes deeper than that. Civilized nations do not practice cannibalism. Is it because we see humans as something more than just a shell?

Perhaps, because most religions find the dead to have some kind of sanctity. We respect the dead by taking care of the body post mordem. As far back as ancient Egypt and the Aztec we mummified bodies to preserve them. How did that practice begin and why? Did the Egyptians and the Aztec believe that the body had some significance either on the afterlife, or was it just something done to honor the dead? Would civilization begin to have less respect for the living if we began consuming our dead? What do you think would change, and how?
poohat
Newbie

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 19, 2004
Location: London

Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 0
#27 - Quote - Permalink
Posted May 21, 2004 - 12:02 PM:

Checksum wrote:
I feel that if my dad were to die of some cause, to gut him and cook him would be terribly traumatizing. If we have no problems as a society eating other people, what's to say we won't just walk out the door and gut some stranger for dinner? I mean, in this scenario it's not that different.

Its completely different. Thats like saying that if as a society we have no problem with eating animals everyone will just go out and kill each others pets.
weqweq
Newbie
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 21, 2004
Location: england

Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 1
#28 - Quote - Permalink
Posted May 21, 2004 - 3:14 PM:

Piramni wrote:
I am an Atheist. I was attempting to figure out how it became a taboo in the first place. Most morals have a base in some religious text, and that's why I asked.


Religious reasons:
"For dust thou art and unto dust thou shalt return" (Genesis 3:19).
"Thou shalt surely bury him" (Deuteronomy 21:23)
Deuteronomy 21:23: "You must not allow his body to remain on the stake overnight, but must surely bury him the same day".
Jacob to his son Joseph to bury him: "Deal kindly and truly with me" (Gen. 47:29).
(http://www.uscj.org/Hayyei_Sarah_5762695.html)

Jewdism also strongly dissarees with cannibalism from a view of the dietary laws, it is as bad as eating pig or elephant.
It is not however one of the things that are prohibited in a case of saving human life. People are alowed, if not obligated, to take human parts for transplants.

The tabo has proably also grown up due to the health issues. People did not know about CJD until reasonably reacently, but they did know not to eat animals that had died from natural cause, as it could lead to dissease being spread. And it is definatly wrong to kill the humans to eat them.


rachel wrote:
While I'm not sure what the ethical dimensions are to eating a human without their permission, I think there are legal reasons.
In my opinion it is not wrong to eat another human, regardless on the dead persons oppinion. Of course close famially etc should have the first choice about what happens to the body in terms of being eaten. In my opinion it shoud be illeagle not to alow a dead persons organs be donnated to medicine, if it is possable. The dead should be choped up and stripped of their organs whan they die, no questions asked.

rachel wrote:
I also don't have a problem with non-voluntary euthanasia in certain situations, which is the scenario you describe.
What I ment was if human consomption become a regular occurance there may be cases of people being encouraged towards death by a hungary famially. The problem is not the non-voluntary euthanasia, but the issue of the disscision to carry out the non-voluntary euthanasia being affected by how hungary people feel, the matter should be juged on other aspects of the situation (eg. the illness, the person in a coma's known oppinions, avaliability of hospital beds, etc.) Cannibalism is not wrong, but it may need to be restricted.

Piramni wrote:
We have enough testing procedures to avoid any diseases before consumption....

...As for there not being a hunger problem, 1 in every 10 children in the United States goes to bed hungry.

Testing on the body would proably be more expencive than just simply buying normal food for the children.
Radrook
Unmoderated Member

Usergroup: Unmoderated Member
Joined: Aug 11, 2002

Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 4
#29 - Quote - Permalink
Posted May 21, 2004 - 5:26 PM:

Is it right or wrong?
According to Kant human beings should never be viewed as a means.
If a society adopted a cannibalistic policy, such as is illustrated in the Sci Fi film Soylent Green, then this philosophical Kantian principle would be violated and those abiding by its merits would view such a policy as immoral based on that principle.

From a strictly consequentialist viewpoint, which would set the Kantian kingdom of ends stipulation aside, it would seem justifiable, In fact, from such a viewpoint it would be immoral not to establish such a cannibalistic policy if its absence would result in the detriment of the majority of citizens.

Of course the institution of such a policy would raise many legal issues that would require a modification of governmental constitutions in order to legalize them. On the other hand, that would require that certain legalizations violate what are at present considered to be under most governments inalienable human rights.
jamis
Newbie

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 24, 2004

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 0
#30 - Quote - Permalink
Posted May 24, 2004 - 9:08 AM:

1. Dead people have rights too, even after death. Your body parts can't be removed, consumed or used in any 'unusual' way without your permission.

2. To eat a dead body, even in extreme circumstances like being on a desert island without food, would still be a serious legal issue. You would have to prove without doubt that there was no other food source to sustain you and that you were in dire need. These are extreme circumstances and it such example would always be one-offs, not established practices.

3. Comparison to pacific island cultures is null and void, because before you can even consider cannibalism you would need to sanction murder or extremely unhygienic practices.

4. And even if grandpa consents to you chowing down on his remains, I don't think it would stand up in court, unless possibly as point 2. One would simply not be considered legally sane to request such a thing, and by law you cannot make a contract with an insane person.

PS - I was looking for a gory font colour for this post, but this one seems to have dried up a little.

smiling face
locked
Download thread as
  • 0/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5



This thread is closed, so you cannot post a reply.