Arguments in favor of cannibalism
0 Comments Published by Icon on Monday, August 4, 2008 at 1:06 PM.
Fat People
More meat, or more grease, depending on how you decide to you use the product, either way it's more. It could be argued that if your quality of life isn't high due to the fact that you are fat, then it would be better if you served as nutrition for poorer skinnier people. Also, why should one person have an excess of body-fat while other people starve? It seems to me that America's hunger problem could be solved simply by using the top 1% of fat people to feed the bottom 10% of the hungry.
Supposedly Tasty
In the words of Daniel Rakowitz: "I killed her and boiled her head," he told a friend, "Then I made soup out of her brains. It tasted pretty good." There is also this guy here who is pretty graphic. Apparently people are delicious, if not delicious then at least edible. Edible enough that if it comes down to a choice between eating somebody or starving, your decision should be pretty clear.
Lots of Useless People
Dead weight. Seriously, you could kill half of the people on the planet and the only difference would be the opening of a few more dead-end jobs and an increased availability of tiny, depressing apartments, and that's in the First World. You could argue that if somebody is being paid a wage to do something that they are not "useless", but the fact is that if they die then the remainder will be paid a better wage due to the fact that the working-poor will be scarcer than before. You will have fewer poor people, and the ones that remain will be well fed and better-paid. How is that not a win-win?
Logical
People are made of meat, meat is nutritious. People die, leaving the meat behind, which is still edible. If you can rid the world of the cultural issues with eating human flesh, you could rid the world of hunger.
More meat, or more grease, depending on how you decide to you use the product, either way it's more. It could be argued that if your quality of life isn't high due to the fact that you are fat, then it would be better if you served as nutrition for poorer skinnier people. Also, why should one person have an excess of body-fat while other people starve? It seems to me that America's hunger problem could be solved simply by using the top 1% of fat people to feed the bottom 10% of the hungry.
Supposedly Tasty
In the words of Daniel Rakowitz: "I killed her and boiled her head," he told a friend, "Then I made soup out of her brains. It tasted pretty good." There is also this guy here who is pretty graphic. Apparently people are delicious, if not delicious then at least edible. Edible enough that if it comes down to a choice between eating somebody or starving, your decision should be pretty clear.
Lots of Useless People
Dead weight. Seriously, you could kill half of the people on the planet and the only difference would be the opening of a few more dead-end jobs and an increased availability of tiny, depressing apartments, and that's in the First World. You could argue that if somebody is being paid a wage to do something that they are not "useless", but the fact is that if they die then the remainder will be paid a better wage due to the fact that the working-poor will be scarcer than before. You will have fewer poor people, and the ones that remain will be well fed and better-paid. How is that not a win-win?
Logical
People are made of meat, meat is nutritious. People die, leaving the meat behind, which is still edible. If you can rid the world of the cultural issues with eating human flesh, you could rid the world of hunger.
Labels: Food, People, Social Issues
0 Responses to “Arguments in favor of cannibalism”
Post a Comment