It'd also be worth noting that it takes, what, a quart of saliva to effectively transmit the AIDS virus?

So unless the person is coughing blood like a fountain onto someone else's knife wound, aerosol transmission is virtually unattainable.

Unless the air was particularly humid, but even then; incredibly unlikely.

The other person would have to projectile bleed through the air for it to happen.

@Kah
Or an open wound anywhere between the mouth and small intestine. An ulcer, for example, would still allow blood to blood transmission via the mouth.

Ha you know I didn't know that about the prions being removed through cooking. Very nice contribution. The airborne aspects of AIDS seem thoroughly sacked so no need to even speak my mind about that. On food preparation this would mean that for the particularly high prion areas of the body could still be brought to market, either with specific instruction of how it should be prepared or previously prepared and sold only as a canned food. This slightly increases price aspects of preparation, but it does also allow a large amount of meat that would have been tossed away in my original thought process to continue to market. I mean seriously love the contribution Jenova.

Also, in most cases of cannibalism, I don't know if it was mentioned before; but in societies where men eat the main meat of the body and the women and children eat the brain of the body, the women and children contract CJD. I think it's because of the Brain being the center of the nervous system, and therefore being more likely to contain prions.

Yup that was the part I had found in my studies and what little time I decided to converse it with my anatomy teacher. The location of high concentration I didn't know until after I spoke with the teacher though so I ended up having some truly crippling criticism to start with. Ha seriously painful if you read it over.

I call horsehockey on the bold.

Now, I don't eat human flesh because morally I'd feel wrong, unless I were given those extreme circumstances. I don't like the idea of eating someone, because as humans; we are aware of our existence and aware of what it is we are doing. Other animals wouldn't have a problem with eating the dead remains of others of their kind; Hyenas do it, for example. But we are aware of what it is that we are eating. I don't believe that animals were put here for us to eat, I think we should find some way of living peacefully, but that's not possible for those animals that are carnivores, and require protein to survive.

I have mixed feelings on the whole eating meat/not eating meat thing.

However, I believe that it is our awareness of what it is that we are doing, and how our thought process works that we do not consume human flesh. We're not all Hannibal Lecter. We can't all just eat human flesh; although I am told barbecued meat tastes a lot like how the Head Hunters prepare human flesh.

We would probably be at risk for a lot more diseases than those mentioned. Take into account the fact that cannibalistic tribes were not globally connected. A pandemic can spread across the world in a day now.

But the real reason is pretty obvious. People want to remember their loved ones. Not make sub-par meat products out of them. Can you even imagine what an old person would taste like? It would be absolutely hideous.

Also, take it from someone who has buried four grandparents and two parents. They're not just bodies left behind.

Anyway, I sure wish I was in college so I could spend my day thinking about things that have 0 to do with the real world. Or is it HS? I wish we could rate down topics on Mene, I really do. We'd see a lot less tripe.

I am sorry Guivre but is that last statement an insult to any of my thread visitors way of life or even intellect? If so than you have violated a rule of this area. I would kindly ask that you refrain from directing such possibly inflammatory statements.

I am willing to offer your opinion and criticism on my topic, but only in relation to my topic. The moment you step beyond those binds and begin to directly attack groups here then you become a nuisance.

Now continuing to the arguments pertaining to the thread.

Your first reason is understandable, but primarily invested in theory. If what you said was true in an absolute fashion than eating meat on any occasion would be just as dangerous, and while there have been examples where this has been true, it is primarily in the range of tainted food which can reach across all areas from meat to vegetable.

Second statement has been made and is understood. Though remembering them doesn't require a body...let's face it you never even see it after that last day. Though yes an old man would not taste very good, with degeneration of muscle tissue and adipose tissue it just can't be made well.

Third statement has been made and is understood. But to certain families there are things that seem useless in those final hours. A thread visitor has stated her father would much rather be sprinkled over dinner like a spice than be left to rot away useless in a jar or in the ground. For me it becomes a question of where their souls are. When I hear a loved one has died I cry, because I will never see them again. NEVER. Not even their body is them. Their soul has vacated. Their body is empty. No matter what I do I could never revive them from what they have gone through. The same will be with me. If you stuff me and mount me in your house does not mean I am there still...I will be gone, you just kept my body. My image. But the me that mattered, the me that made these memories of love, the consciousness that could speak, could smile, could laugh, could care. It is gone. Forever.

To Jenova. I've had mixed feelings about eating meat for a while as well. I figure in logically believing that I could eat a man I don't live by a double standard. If I couldn't eat a human than I couldn't eat an animal. It doesn't seem fair. I can love a dog, a turtle, a rabbit. They seem to care, to show affection, and on more than one occasion they have protected me. I can't ignore that with skill. I'd still eat a rabbit, a turtle, and yes even a dog if necessary. Because if I can eat a cow, a chicken, a pig with no problems I cannot in good conscience avoid other meat without good reason. I hate to live in absolutes but this one seemed necessary to me, I either eat meat, all meat, or I don't.

There is at least one civilized society that takes part in cannibalism. I believe it is in Asia....
I'm a vegetarian, yet I am intrigued by cannibalism; I google it sometimes. xD

nothing neccissarilly wrong with it.
human are just gross, icky virus/germ infested bags of flesh.
i don't find anything wrong with eating humans, i just never would, i find live humans to be grotesque most of the time....so yea...
^-^

Personally, I think it'd be best to have limited cannibalism than to have animals farmed and eaten as they are.
After all, that would improve the quality of life for everyone; animals and people.
Animals wouldn't be under as harsh of conditions as they often are now [just living to be killed and all...], and humans look after their own health and wellness [usually], so it might even be healthier.

There's obviously no scientific backing to my argument, it's simply my own logic. xD

i take it you are meaning a soilent green method (prossessed bodys) rather than just eating at some one's body.

there are two reasons:

1 BSE - be replace that with some human equivelent like AIDS. eating people would increase in the amount of infections passed around. true you can say that steps can be taken to provent it but i would like to point out that steps had been taken to prevent something like BSE or Mad cows desease.

2 morals - death of one human leads to the feeding of others, what is the stop the unlawfull killing of humans to feed others. using sweeny tod as a very exagurated example. as soon as profit is accessable from the death of others then there will be murders. wats to say that the untracable masses of the world, the run aways, the abducties and the homeless, whats to say that these would not be murdered for their meat by unlawfull persons.

btw Zombie Zombie i would like to ask you why would it be better for animals? because they wouldnt get used for food? they are not being completly replaced. also they would ever exist. the farmer raises chickens so that they and their eggs can been eaten, not because he wants them as a pet. if the deman was to drop, so would his livestock. they wouldnt be wild they wouldnt be born!

their conditions would not improve, these pens that have chickens packed in so they can hardly move wouldnt become spaciopus suddenly. No, they would be reduced so that the minimun amount of space could still hold the maximum amount. no improvment, just less born to be effected.


and whilst i think about it, what about the farmers. what for them? better conditions? i think not. they find it hard to get money as it is, cut their livestock in half (as would happen due to lack of demand) and what then? lets say they take the unrealistic path of taking up other employment(unlikly due to the fact they have been brought up to be farmers and many have not the quolifercations to be anything else) then it would eventually lead to a food shortage and an increase in food prices. (exagturated true but none the less posible)

that or there is the other path of masses of farmer famillys going bankrupt and having to use their land for other sorces of income such as houses, bye bye country side. btw, this is a likly out come as it happens today why farmers see they can get more profit from properties rather than livestock.

I don't know, I think in terms of cannibalism, if it became widely accepted; I would want it to be dependent on the dying person's wishes. If they wanted to be eaten so that, metaphorically, some part of them would continue living and nourishing a person; there is nothing wrong with that.
Someone methodically murdering people for food, such as Hannibal Lecter, is very wrong in my mind.

That is a slippery slope argument that nearly everyone uses to describe something that they don't want to occur.
That's why if the culture were altered for it to be a religious experience when eating a person, this wouldn't happen. It's someone of a ceremonial gesture rather than eating for nourishment. At least, that's the only way I would find it acceptable, save for the extreme conditions argument.

ah! that would be true if we lived in a world were every one was a god fearing law abaider. however we are not. it may, i admit, have worked in past cultures none tinted by unlawfull activerties but this is no longer the case and it is a fact that their is unlawfull people that will exploit anything they can to get money.



btw i would like to point out that my views are in no way taking into consideration of extreme conditions such as stranded people eating their dead in order to survive.

Alright so the BSE argument is there. How even though we took steps to try to prevent it we still ended up releasing a particular strain upon the earth. In order to totally understand this we must go over the mistake in question that began the BSE outbreak in Britain. You find that due to the lack of the most common form of feed for cow, soya bean, was not abundant in Europe. So to give the cows the protein they needed they resorted to feeding them meat, meat from other cows. Meat that was basically a whole cow put through a meat grinder and served up. This began the prion spread, and soon one of the cows that would be used for feed to other cows had consumed enough prions to cause it's BSE. It's prions were now totally tainted with the disease which meant any cow that ate it's nervous tissue would almost immediately gain it's disease as well.

So that is the story of how BSE started. It was reduced to as much as possible by culling every single cow that was diagnosed with BSE and stopping the irresponsible practice of feeding the cows other cows, mostly to show the world so, they really only needed to remove the nervous tissue from the mix.

At the time there is little BSE in the world at all. About 4 to 5 cases a year, but we keep eating meat anyway. With the knowledge we have about this it means that the likeliness of the human version of this causing an outbreak is low to none. We know the cause, and so will avoid it for the sake of sales saavy.

On your second point I will believe that this is possible. That perhaps someone may take the dregs of the streets and murder them in order to feed us. Though this arises that unusual question that keeps most humans from doing things like this. Why would you? There are plenty of corpses in the world for us to feed on without killing people, and those people on the streets are going to be primary feed even if they aren't murdered. From Albuquerque to Seattle to Detroit to Chicago, the winter months freeze many homeless to death no matter how hard you try. Legitimate companies don't need to murder in order to get their status quo, it will come to them.

To me there are only two groups that might do this purposefully, one though just because you brought up soylent green, and the other because it was in your argument. The government or "unlawful persons." The government would get away with this for years assured. If they aimed for the dregs of society in order to give the economy a boost I have a feeling barely anyone would notice, anyone that did would end up in the same van. The government regulated human meat industry would be booming, and people knowing they were eating human wouldn't question how the person died, just like you don't question the cow. Devilish. But still awkward in the fact that if it did get out it would be something that could break the camel's back. Humans can support the eating of dead soulless tissue, but the deaths of others...that is something greater.

Unlawful persons are a strange group. This is the company that does what you said. If they are caught they are destroyed. Their company is shut down. Their whole organization goes to prison...no they would be put to death. A heavy risk. The other side is street dealers...I don't know about you but I don't buy meat off the streets. I buy it in a supermarket, with that big, but basically useless, USDA sticker and the assurance the beef is good. A hunter may be able to get away with it by selling jerky at a flea market, but if he made it a methodical practice something tells me he may get caught in the future and put to death. That would kill my trust in them. It just feels like a strange thing.

As for farmers. This is one industry, the meat industry, the most powerful industry in the farming community when it comes to money. They have a union, powerful lobbyists, capable politicians that were once part of them. They could, very likely, kill the human meat industry before it starts...or...they could become the primary runners of it. In order for this to work either the government must be in complete control of the industry or they must regulate corporations that will do all of the collection and processing. In the farming of meat this is no longer a thing that is just farmers. When it comes down to it the farmers that work in this industry are almost a monopoly that runs all the way down from birth, to slaughter, to processing, to sale. They just need to take the humans at the processing part and then they get the profits of the industry. For really there is no one else besides advanced anatomists and surgeons that know how to do such a thing with the skill they do. This may or may not reduce our reliance on cattle and poultry. Though if it works correctly it won't destroy the farming community...it will empower it.

As for the person's permission in eating their body,I figure we could run a similar thing to the organ donor program. We get people willing to give up their bodies for such a thing and basically at some point in their life they get the fancy lettering on their ID. I am an organ and muscle donor. xB

Regardless of if it is legal or not, people will break the law if they see fit anyway. Making it culturally acceptable won't really change how people already act. If someone is going to disregard the law, they won't pay attention anyway.

God will this debate ever END? Lets just agree to disagree Yoshiaki. XD hahaha.
I know you have some really good points... but I still don't like the idea of eating human flesh.

Ha I dunno Thoth in a way this is me battling to give people open mindedness. I could go around to every pop 8 esque thread and argue about how people should be allowed to get married and blah blah, work past all the lawyer written bull that confuses the hell out of people till their polarized, sometimes on the wrong side, until everyone is a mesh of confusion that doesn't even know what they are arguing about. Or I can do this. Talk about cannibalism, and how it could be done. There are no lawyers writing strangely worded propositions about it, no hive mind of specialists cruising the major news channels saying what they will, there are just the facts. Biology, psychology, sociology, chemistry, aka science. This isn't really about you accepting that you would eat it, but that you could accept the world if it did.

As I heard said sometimes it is sometimes better to rip your opponent a new one in their mind, and if you hit them hard enough than they will be open to the whole universe. All hole, no ass.

And believe me there will always be someone around the corner who is all ass just waiting for me to rip them. xB

Now back on topic. Ha good call Jenova, looking at how easily you put that makes me think I really ought to slow down my brain and stop over explaining my points.

that is the point i was trying to make. if unlaw abiding persons could gain profit from cadavers then what would stop them from murdering or farming humans?