Why, though? I mean, they’re dead. It’s not like they need their bodies.
Who are we pitting, the crazed colonials who turned to NC, or the natives who kept them hunkered in their camp, preventing them from going out to forage for food?
I pit evolution, for denying us photosynthesis. Dick move.
Jamestown settlement: 1607
Declaration of Independence: 1776
We are closer to the Civil War today than anyone who could be described as a “Founding Father” was to Jamestown.
At the risk of being unimaginatively literal in a thread bursting at the seams with rank jokes, I give you the ur-story on which I suspect the Python Navy cannabalism jokes were based:
Famous case historically about the development of the law regarding the defence of extraordinary emergency.
No matter how much of a problem you think you have, Necrocannibals Anonymous is one meeting you do not ever want to attend.
Hell, be glad that the US took its holiday of Thanksgiving from the Puritans, rather than from Jamestown. Turkey once a year is okay … 
Somebody dig up Aunt Martha, it’s Thanksgiving again. But I’m not doing the stuffing this year.
Did they have “bath salts” back then?:eek:
It’s exasperating thinking about cannibalism. I usually just throw up my hands.
Well, if cannibalism isn’t always wrong, then we have a case of ‘founding fathers’ (some people don’t think that term applies) applying situational ethics. They don’t adhere to a rigid ideology at all… apparently about anything if kleptonecrocannibalism is fair game.
How will today’s right-wingers defend their ‘no tax increases under any circumstances’ ideology in the face of this example? I mean, today, without affordable health care, people are literally dying, and we’ll have to raise taxes and cut the military to pay for it along with all the other programs we’ll want to apply to our situation. Ideology as a means of resistance goes pretty much out the window if you are going to budge on cannibalism fer cryin’ out loud.
I could produce plenty of other examples; they don’t have to focus on the right. A world with NC allowed is a world with very few bright lines, no?
You know, I think you made more sense when you were railing about circumcision and BP. :rolleyes:
Your logic is not sound.
NC is not “allowed” in our society by any means. Nobody has set up Stiffy’s Cemetery and Delicatessen. Cannibalism is only acceptable in dire survival circumstances, and then only barely so.
Once a person is dead, and other people are literally starving to death around said dead person, then the dead person must be a source of protein, it the others are to survive. This is simple, logical survival ethics.
That took me a minute to process. Bravo.
(ETA - my god, why didn’t I say “two thumbs up”?)
Yes it is.
So, is it or is it not allowed? Whether or not ethics are situational lies in the balance. Ostensibly.
You mean situational ethics. Therefore ideology is invalid.
[QUOTE=Maus Magill]
Once a person is dead, and other people are literally starving to death around said dead person, then the dead person must be a source of protein, it the others are to survive. This is simple, logical survival ethics.
[/QUOTE]
I’ve been to a couple of college graduations lately and can’t help but think how great an opening line that would be for a commencement speech. Attention getting, to the point, historically allusive, and very relevant for students graduating in the current economy.
Really? That, to you, is the worst possible crime? Worse than murdering someone and burying them respectfully, so that there is more food for you? Worse than stealing firewood from someone freezing so that you can live, even though they freeze to death?
I really think that is a very atypical view.
I doubt it is the worst possible crime… nuclear terrorism has got to be close to the top of the list, along with dumping 200+ million gallons of oil into the Gulf, among other things. But this story was out there, it is particularly disgusting, and at a time when our politics are being made stupid and unjust due to rigid ideologies, the idea that ideologies are perhaps all void because just about any ethical line can be ignored under the right circumstances added to the draw. The last bit isn’t entirely worked out yet, but this story has got me mulling over the notion that everyone who takes a strong stand based on ideology (especially in Congress) is either dumb or faking it. Or, perhaps everyone who takes a strong ideological stand in Congress doesn’t really have an argument but merely some pet interest.
So- lurid story that has me wondering about ethical questions. It’s okay that the thread is all jokes, but I wonder if anyone can see what I mean about ideology through these kinds of examples.
And I am not joking when I say if I am literally starving and you are lying dead in front of me, then I am going to eat you without a second thought. My ideology dictates it’s better for just one of us to be dead than both of us.
Naw. It’s the name of the local high school’s sports teams.