Is cannibalism morally wrong (in non-emergency situations)?

I specify “non-emergency situations” because I don’t want to argue about plane crash survivors surviving on dead passengers because it’s all there is to eat. I’m talking about just talking about grilling up some human on the BBQ at home because it’s special dinner night.

But wait, obviously, what with cannibalism being sort of completely illegal (and many health risks associated with eaten some human parts), let’s add some ground rules:

  1. Any person who is sold for meat after death has agreed to it ahead of time while in sound mind, as an adult. They are not slaughtered or killed for their meat (I don’t want this to double as a “is suicide okay?” thread). Any in-tact organs that could be used to help people or kept in storage for such a purpose are taken for medical use and saving lives first.

  2. Some magical future machine can use its de-enbadenator ray to make the meat unable to give you any funky diseases or prions or anything (or if you don’t accept that, it goes through a semi-magic nearly perfect screening process so that no bad meat passes through).

  3. Human meat is clearly labelled and sold as such. Not even any potentially confusing euphemisms like “longpig” or “soylent green” allowed. It is prominently and obviously marketed as “human meat”. If you’re buying and making it, you know so. If we want to reintroduce magic, we can also say that there’s some way of letting would-be hapless potluck attendees that human meat is in a dish, but I don’t want to cover every conceivable avenue in these rules.

  4. Everyone who isn’t you has magically shifted mindset overnight so that you won’t be ostracized and labeled a sicko if you eat human meat (this is to remove the “it’s wrong because I’m afraid of what others will do to me” objection), but nobody will be particularly offended if you don’t either. They essentially completely apathetic about whether you eat it or not.

Are these rules impractical, and unlikely to produce meat in any quantity that a normal person will every get any? Yeah, but the point of the hypothetical was to eliminate the unsavory aspects of real world cannibalism in first world western civilization so we could focus on the morals of completely humane, non-free-agency infringing, non-disease ridden human meat.

I personally don’t see anything wrong with it. For the record, I also see nothing wrong with eating cat or dog or horse. As long as you’re not abducting people’s pets or forcing it on people who rather wouldn’t eat it, whatever. As far as I’m concerned, it’s just food. Whatever. I don’t foresee any slippery slope where suddenly people are murdering others because they absolutely NEED their next fix of human meat unless they were already dangerous unhinged psychos anyway. I don’t think it’s exactly common to go around abducting people’s pet pigs to eat them and pork is common.

I apologize that I can’t give a longer, more thorough, detailed analysis of the morality. To me it’s seriously just “… meh.” I predict that many (most) of you will probably disagree with me, but to any counterargument I dream up my response is mostly just “check the ground rules” or “meh, not really a big problem.”

I guess one objection I could address is what happens when a family wants a body for the funeral while the deceased wanted his body sold as meat, but I feel there’s already some conflict there when it comes to being an organ doner, or a med school cadaver – or when the deceased has specific burial wishes that conflict with the family’s. I don’t really see this as being too fundamentally different.

The only other objection I can really think of is a shortage of educational or research cadavers. I almost made the lack of impact on this supply a ground rule, but decided against it. Personally I don’t think that too many people that allow their bodies to be cadavers would suddenly be jumping at the chance to be sold as a delicacy instead. That said, this thread is more about whether there’s anything “magically” (for lack of a better word) wrong with it. Any pressing ethical reason why eating human is badbadbad regardless of how humane it is and such.

The astute among you will recall that I started this thread a long time ago. I swear on chocolate and baby kittens that I don’t have some obsession with trying human meat/being served as meat and your mother is definitely out on vacation for a year and not on the grill in my back yard right now.

Are these rules “impractical”?!

When you specify the need for magic, YES!.

Reported for move to Cafe Society.

Of course not. Because you removed anything wrong with it in 1-4.

Tautology thread is a tautology.

I think cannibalism is alright. What makes humans so special? A human is an animal, just like a cow, chicken and pig are. We eat those every day. If I was hungry enough and there was a dead body that didn’t already start to decompose, I’d eat it after I cooked the shit out of it.

I believe it is immoral to treat other humans as a commodity, whether for their labor, as food, or as biological batteries to run the omni-computers. (For the record, I’m not too keen on ‘voluntary’ wage slavery either, but that’s a compromise we need to make these days.)

Why not gut it first?

If nobody is harmed by something, then it cannot be morally wrong.

This thread explains so so much about you, Jragon. You weren’t biting yourself as punishment before, when you posted those photos of teeth marks in your arm. You were just snacking.

By removing more or less all objectionable aspects of cannibalism, you’ve given precious little to disagree with. In reality, even the best-intentioned rules would be quickly subverted to the detriment of both producer (ewww) and consumer.

This, all of this.

Plus there’s always a “this just feels wrong” element to it - you don’t sleep with your sister, you don’t shit upstream from your drinking spot, and you don’t eat your own kind. Sure, people have done all of these, but they should know better, really.

Unless we taste like foie gras with truffles, in which case, all bets are off.

They’re dead when you eat them and thus not really human for any practical purpose.

Most civilized cultures demand at least some level of respect for mortal remains. Carving up a corpse violates a pretty fundamental taboo. In my mind, waiting for someone to die and then eating them is only marginally less depraved than killing them for the purpose of consuming them (as some sad cultures have practices). From an objective point of view, meat is meat, but a lot of our cultural practices depend on the idea that humans are special in non-quantifiable ways.

I reject premise #1. I think, IRL, if there was any way to make money off human remains someone, somewhere would decide to accelerate the “harvest” instead of waiting for it. We are already seeing this this with organ black markets and the like.

I’ve always been curious about human meat. I’d try it

is it any worse than boxing them, burying them and letting them rot?

Rather than a commodity to be bought and sold, how about a sacred feast honoring the dead. Whatever parts are salvagable are prepared in a way that honors the dead, perhaps a favorite dish of the deceased.

If you want to know, I consider burial grounds to be a waste of arable land. Both my wife and I have directions to be cremated, since they don’t allow sky burial in Connecticut.

Having just read a book about cannibalism, no. Just…no.

In fact, if I recall correctly, it can end up causing the human equivalent of mad cow disease.

Kuru, probably. Fun times.

The serious aspects being duly addressed, I’m mildly surprised someone (before me) didn’t seize upon the OP’s reference to

Doner, which could possibly be made of organ meat. :stuck_out_tongue: