Cannibalism

[Hundegesicht]

Hell no! Sheesh, every time I criticise a thiest they claim I do because I have some sort of deep seated hatred or disgust or something with them. I do not! There are illogical theists, logical thiests, illogical athiests and logical athiests. Just 'cause I find Ham-Babs illogical doesn't mean I find all religionists illogical.

I'm not even talking about you. Hamatic Babylon's comment was directed at rmsharpe...

And why not tell him what he wants to hear? (Especially since this topic has absolutely nothing to do with Islam, eh?)

No, I was refering to the fact that Mr. Sharpe constantly whines about poor customer service at fast food establishments.

Exactly.

I was trying to make an, admittedly sarcastic, comment about Hambabs construing wild and inaccurate conspiracies to explain why rmsharpe disagrees with him while the truth is a bit simpler than that. (I'll give you a hint; it doesn't have to do with fast food)

Sorry if my posts are rather cryptic. I assume people will be able to figure them out from the context...

 

[amadeus]

No, I was refering to the fact that Mr. Sharpe constantly whines about poor customer service at fast food establishments.

Constantly? It's like maybe 5 posts out of almost 12,000 total!

 

[Perfection]

I'm not even talking about you. Hamatic Babylon's comment was directed at rmsharpe...

He was quoting me, and he was talking about athiesm. Mr. Sharpe is not an athiest.

And why not tell him what he wants to hear? (Especially since this topic has absolutely nothing to do with Islam, eh?)

Because that's his ammo, he plays the underdog card.

Exactly.

I was trying to make an, admittedly sarcastic, comment about Hambabs construing wild and inaccurate conspiracies to explain why rmsharpe disagrees with him while the truth is a bit simpler than that. (I'll give you a hint; it doesn't have to do with fast food)

Okay I think we're on the same page now.

Sorry if my posts are rather cryptic. I assume people will be able to figure them out from the context...

The context is misleading...

Constantly? It's like maybe 5 posts out of almost 12,000 total!

It's at least 15 posts, that counts as constantly for whining about fast food in my book.

 

[Knowze Gungk]

This isn't a question people can answer unless they have experienced true starvation. And true starvation isn't being forced into eating scraps from a bin, it's more like eating sand, if only to put something in your stomach. Once a person reaches that stage, whatever morals they used to have go straight out the window, the hunger takes over and you will eat anything you can swallow, including a rotting corpse.

 

[Hundegesicht]

He was quoting me, and he was talking about athiesm. Mr. Sharpe is not an athiest.

He isn't? My bad, then. (Though, IIRC, neither are you...)

 

[Perfection]

He isn't? My bad, then. (Though, IIRC, neither are you...)

I'm in the nether regions between athiesm and agnosticism. I recognize that god could possibly exist, but I don't think it does.

 

[plarq]

If cannibalism can guranteed my survival in such a harsh situation,I'll take the dive.
If not,I'll just choose starving myself,it's better dying of honor than dying barbaricly.

 

[The Last Conformist]

I'm in the nether regions between athiesm and agnosticism. I recognize that god could possibly exist, but I don't think it does.

I think we should call it sane peoplism.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

So, you'd only eat it if it were processed human flesh? How does that make it better?

Soylent Green was like a green cracker or biscuit IIRC. I could force them down quickly and try not to think about it. But slice hunks of meat off of a corpse and eat it? No way.

 

[silver 2039]

It would be better if it were cooked.

 

[punkbass2000]

The point is, your statement about natural selection assumes that cannibalism has been "bred" out of us,...

WEll, not really, but I can see how you think that was implied.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

Eating people? Just sounds sick, unless you were starving to , and there was no food other than the people who were'nt as lucky as you, (or maybe luckier that they died faster) as you and died in that plane crash. To me, that's the only exception.

This isn't a question people can answer unless they have experienced true starvation. And true starvation isn't being forced into eating scraps from a bin, it's more like eating sand, if only to put something in your stomach. Once a person reaches that stage, whatever morals they used to have go straight out the window, the hunger takes over and you will eat anything you can swallow, including a rotting corpse.

How do you know? Have you ever starved?

 

[Fox Mccloud]

You have a choice of 100% chance of being wiped out by starvation or maybe 30% chance of being wiped out by disease (and I'm probably grossly exaggering the chance of disease here) from eating humans.

I also think you are exaggerating the chances of starvation. Go to wikipedia or whatever source you want, and try to find 1 historical famine with even a 50% mortality, then get back to me.

If maybe 1 in 10 got wiped out by an odd disease or two from cannibalism, if cannibalism allows the other 9 in 10 to survive, it's worth the trade-off.

Agreed, but why are people soo worried about diseases from human meat? All you half to do is cook them. I cook all my pig, cow, and chicken meat, then it's harmless, so why doesn't the same apply to people? Get back to me on that, too.

 

[The Last Conformist]

I also think you are exaggerating the chances of starvation. Go to wikipedia or whatever source you want, and try to find 1 historical famine with even a 50% mortality, then get back to me.

Don't be stupid. The mortality rate of famines isn't like the mortality rate of an infection. Some people survive because there is some food available.

If you want an example of "cannibalism or die", the Latin American footballers who crashed in the Andes have been mentioned a couple times already in this thread

 

[Fox Mccloud]

Don't be stupid. The mortality rate of famines isn't like the mortality rate of an infection. Some people survive because there is some food available.

What I meant was that not everyone that goes throrouhg starvation dies, some survive because there is some food, yes, but the chances of in a big famine aren't a full 100% In the one incident you mentioned, they had no food at all. In a big, nation-wide famine, there is always some food, just not enough. btw, just thought, if people started eating eachother in a starving region, than the famine will end faster, kill less people and by starvation must hurt a lot more than being shot, so canniballism is ok during those times. It gets rid of overpopulation.

 

[Steve Thompson]

I read that if you go too long without eating and your body has already used up most of your fat and muscle, it starts targeting the brain for protein, and the first thing it starts eating away at is the part of the brain that controls your ideas on morals and ethics (cerebral cortex???) so you are more likely to resort to cannibalism!

Can anyone confirm that?

 

[amadeus]

He isn't?

I'll sum my religious beliefs for you.

I believe that God exists. I also believe that religious ceremonies and traditions are basically ancient methods of subjugating the peasants of countries. Think of how many rulers used the church under their "divine rule."

I believe that clergymen are effectively businessmen with good intentions, but is irrelevant to each individual's beliefs. The Bible or any other religious text should not be taken literally, as we cannot identify the original intent of the authors.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Are you then a deist?

 

[cgannon64]

If you're willing to kill someone to save your own life, I don't see why should be wasteful and not eat the body.

You've already killed them; can it really get worse?

 

[Taliesin]

The real question, as Calvin puts it, is whether cannibalism should be grounds for leniency in murder cases on account of it being less wasteful.