What is the view of different religions/faiths on eating a dead companion (that was not killed to eat nor killed by you) when one perceives it to be a life and death situation that is dependant on that nutrition? What are the penalities for such actions?
Also what are the legal aspects?
The classic historical case in English law is Regina v. Dudley and Stephens.
In a New York minute!
Oh, you want the moral and legal stuff.
Well, catholics symbolically eat Jesus to save their souls. Don’t know, though, about mortals. We never covered that in catechism. I think it would be ok.
Hey, I’ll give you a hypothetical situation:
Me, Zeke, Bill, Mike, and Joe pile into a B-52 to bomb the bajeezus out of Siberia in World War III. We don’t make it back, and we crash land somewhere in the Yakutsk. Joe gets killed on impact.
Would I? Yep. Given Joe died by something else, and survival is the first order of business, I would home my God would forgive me. Hell, I’ve eaten cat, dog, snake, turtle, snail, you name it. I won’t go to a restaurant and order “people” [sub]unless Charlton Heston is there[/sub], but it’s like I said, group survival is the first order of business.
Legal impacts? In bonzer’s cite, someone got killed in order to feed the others. That’s murder. If you find a source of protien, that’s a different story. . .
Check out that movie Alive. It’ll make you think some.
Tripler
Gruesome, ain’t it?
Wow the prochoice movement would go ape___ over this one.
But I am really interested in when the companion dies for other reasons and you are starving, in need of food (or perceive your self in a situation) and that corpse is the only food you know of.
It is an interesting link though
“home” = “hope”
Tripler
Damn preview.
In the case of the movie, “Alive,” and the real-life incident that suggested it, the Uruguayans did not kill anyone. They ate bits of those who did not survive the crash or the avalanche shortly afterwards.
Upon their rescue, many of them sought absolution, and were reassured that the Catholic Church does not regard cannibalism as a sin, under extreme circumstances, unless other sins are involved in obtaining the groceries, so to speak.
Cite: “Alive,” by Piers Paul Read.
Thanks for the clarification and cite.
Tripler
“Joe” would have appreciated it. 
Whoops. Should have said that the Catholic Church does not consider “cannibalism in extremis” a sin, period.
Admittedly, other sins can be committed in RELATION to cannibalism – murder, gluttony, and so forth – but assuming you were gonna die if you didn’t eat an existing corpse, eating it does not constitute a sin.
By the same token, REFUSAL to eat a corpse, and subsequent death by starvation, does NOT constitute “suicide” which is forbidden by the Catholic Church.
(readin’ with one hand, typin’ with the other, here…)
Jewish law allows (and IIRC, requires) one to eat a dead body rather than starve. However, killing is one of the three sins that one has to die rather than commit, so offing someone to get the dead body is definitely out
Hmmm…but what about killing YOURSELF, so that OTHERS might feed on your corpse?