Ukraine flag Armor Games stands with Ukraine Ukraine flag
If you’d like to help, please consider giving to Ukraine Crisis Fund

ForumsWEPRCannibalism

146 48516
TheAngelOfWar
offline
TheAngelOfWar
206 posts
Nomad

http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-cannibalism-be-illegal

55 say Yes cannibalism should be illegal
45 say No cannibalism should not be illegal

Please. Someone give me reason to believe in humanity again.

  • 146 Replies
FishPreferred
offline
FishPreferred
3,173 posts
Duke

I'm trying to explain how there are occultist groups that act out cannibalism and compared to all others; they are not of sound mind.
And I'm trying to explain how that doesn't relate to the topic in any way.

You couldn't tell me the first thing about the Church of Satan or ONA, how could you determine determine anything about them.
Nice well-poison you have there.

Parahilia involves vor[ar]ephilia; Vor[ar]ephilia is a branch of paraphilia.
So?

No, no one cares of you hate Nazis, [...]
Stop changing the subject. It was about &quotutting down" and "making fun of" Nazis; not about hating them.

Think of a social construct, I promise you that it can be found in nature.
Responding on your comment board, due to irrelevance.

What culture? The culture I brought up, remember about I pointed out that tribe that ate dead bodies that didn't even belong to their group?
I don't even know which culture that is. You never named it. How do you expect me to defend a culture that, as far as I know, may not even exist?

The scale is an important piece because it outlines the fact that cannibalism has no positive effect on society but has had negative ones.
No it doesn't. This has been explained to you several times already. Cannibalism is not what makes any of those negative things negative. They are negative because they involve assault, murder, and/or rampant starvation.

Also cannibalism is illegal in modern countries indirectly because of medical waste laws.
Therefore, so is eating nachos.
thebluerabbit
offline
thebluerabbit
5,345 posts
Farmer

That ‘would’ be true if there were ‘many’ groups. There is only a select few (from what I can tell only 2 or 3 tribes primarily) that execute this act.
Prove that these groups are respect worthy. Native Americans have moved on, African Tribes (a lot of them anyways) have moved on. Yes they are human and deserve the respect of a human but is their culture okay? Let’s look at it this way.
It’s okay to put down Nazis. No one really cares, let’s be honest, it’s the truth. I don’t care if you make fun of a Nazi and honestly really no one does. Just because someone is a Nazi does that mean we should beat them up as soon as we find out? No. Should we help them? Yes.

even 2 people are a group.

&quotrove that someone deserves respect" is pretty much saying he is similiar to you. everybody deserves respect. and even if thats not true, that doesnt mean anything.

why bring up nazis? i dont think anyone there really gave consent? no, a nazi shouldnt be beat up. help? they dont need help. they have a set of beliefs and if they dont want to listen to common sense its their right. as long as they dont act on it and hurt people it doesnt matter.

Aha, so the truth comes out, I have never stated that I am a Christian, you marked me as one, “my religion”, how would you know it’s my religion if I never said it was.

FishPreffered and Batman picture post.

maybe i wasnt clear? i used "you" in a general way. it puts you as an example of "a person" and continues with that. i can use that because you gave the argument yourself. maybe that use of "you" does not exist in english?

TheAngelOfWar
offline
TheAngelOfWar
206 posts
Nomad

Man... I didn't actually think it'd come to this but...

I'll respond to you guys on Christmas, it'll be my gift to you

TheAngelOfWar
offline
TheAngelOfWar
206 posts
Nomad

Don't worry guys, I'm getting there.

nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,920 posts
Grand Duke

Also cannibalism is illegal in modern countries indirectly because of medical waste laws.

The laws are simply to prevent accumulation of medical waste and aims to dispose of them in an orderly and hygienic fashion. It doesn't touch on the moral aspect of cannibalism, so referring to such laws doesn't actually further any argument on the anti-cannibalism camp.

You can sign documents like waivers such that the hospital will return the organ to you after treatment. Common examples would be placentas after childbirth as some mothers consume them.

Such a gory subject on Christmas afternoon!

TheAngelOfWar
offline
TheAngelOfWar
206 posts
Nomad

@nichodemus

Come on guys. Make up your mind. The time line isn't valid apprently because it has to do with morals and not laws, now you're telling me this law doesn't apply because it has nothing to do with morals.

Bottom line you can't cannibalize dead people. Period. Also In funerals you don't have any organs in you, they take all of them out and properly dispose of them and your eyes are sewn shut.

Fish and Blue

I will get to you guys sooner or later. Just hold on.

nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,920 posts
Grand Duke

The time line isn't valid apprently because it has to do with morals and not laws, now you're telling me this law doesn't apply because it has nothing to do with morals.

No, the law is valid, but the law isn't explicitly banning cannibalism - the overriding purpose of it is with regard to the disposal of medical waste. Preventing cannibalism is a side effect of the law, an effect that had no moral reasoning behind it. What I'm trying to convey is that the law doesn't concern itself with cannibalism, much less the moral side of it. So quoting the law does little good in furthering an anti-cannibalism argument.

As said before, there are few laws that are tailored towards banning cannibalism, at least in the States and Europe.

My stance is quite clear, so long as there was no murder or tempering with dead bodies to obtain the flesh, and the person giving it was a volunteer, then it's not the law's concern. More or less.

I have no idea what discussions you were having with other people in the thread about time lines and morals and their connection with laws. It doesn't concern me.

Bottom line you can't cannibalize dead people. Period.

That's not an argument, it's just an assertion without a good reason to give it weight and conviction.

Doombreed
offline
Doombreed
7,024 posts
Templar

I really hate to pull this card, it makes me feel like an ares but I'm going through with it.

Then why pull it?

Do you have experience in occultism? Do you conduct research projects on occultism? Have you read books on occultism? I do and have. So who is better suited to speak of occultism (and it's groups), myself or you?

When did I challenge you or your background in occultism? I get it. But I've been pointing out something different.

Actually, he is correct in that hypocrites are people who actually claim to be better than they are. This is more like the pot calling the kettle black, or the ram calling the shepherd hairy.

I apologize, I've never been good with definitions in English. Language barrier doesn't help at all with this.

TheAngelOfWar
offline
TheAngelOfWar
206 posts
Nomad

@nichodemus
It is illegal to consume medical waste.
You cannot legally cannibalize a dead person legally, their funeral and etc all must be accounted for by the state and will be consider the body a medical waste.

@Doombreed
To prove a point.
You used the groups as an example without knowing the first thing about them. I clarified my experience.

TheAngelOfWar
offline
TheAngelOfWar
206 posts
Nomad

@FishPreffered
I know I haven't responded to all your points, I'm not trying to cherry pick, I don't have the time to give an elaborate response to them right now.

@thebluerabbit
Okay dude, if you think you can rationalize genocide, racism, sexism, homophobia, torture, slavery, kidnapping and other traits attributed to Nazism and not need psychological help because they have the right too then i dont know what to tell you.

Doombreed
offline
Doombreed
7,024 posts
Templar

You used the groups as an example without knowing the first thing about them. I clarified my experience

What?

No, you used the groups as an example. At first you used the term "states", which was what I initially challenged (the use of the word). That's how I entered this conersation. Since then, I didn't prove any point, I've been pointing out irrational or at least seemingly irrational parts in your arguments either because an explanation was in order, or because they made sense but were obviously false.

rychus
offline
rychus
1,282 posts
Farmer

It has been scientifically proven that eating human body parts will make you go clinically insane, eventually. I think the article I read stated something about our brains freaking the hell out when we consume human material. It's just not programmed in us to be cannibals, I would assume.

TheAngelOfWar
offline
TheAngelOfWar
206 posts
Nomad

You pointed out several things about ONA, that rely on how do you know and what if. I do know and I have given you an answer with no what if because it is as is.

I am on mobile and can't quote you btw.

TheAngelOfWar
offline
TheAngelOfWar
206 posts
Nomad

@rychus

My previous links draw that conclusion.

However we did evovle with a gene that protected us from cannibalism due to our ancestors. As you can see in the link i provided with an actual disease related to cannibalism it has clearly become weak.

nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,920 posts
Grand Duke

No, you cannot consume human remains that are medical waste. Medical waste is whatever is generated at health facilities. The law doesn't cover human remains in any other situation. So it's not a law that has the explicit purpose of preventing cannibalism not even a law that has cannibalism in its consideration.

The real purpose of the law was to prevent disease spread through hazardous medical waste. A good example would be AIDS tainted blood.

Showing 121-135 of 146

We may use cookies to help customize your experience, including performing analytics and serving ads.
Learn More