Cannibalism is not morally wrong, amirite?

When I go to church and eat the body of Christ it's ok. When I go to church and eat the bodies waiting to be buried in the graveyard suddenly it's frowned upon. Make it make sense

by Ayla94 1 day ago

The bodies can't consent. Jesus is a naughty little freak and is into vore

by Anonymous 1 day ago

They can't consent but they might have already consented. My corpse is fair game to anyone who wants to hang around, just let the doctors take the useful parts first.

by InterestingPay 1 day ago

Oh yeah if you have prior permission that's fair game, just get it in writing.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Liver is my favourite:(

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Well my liver can go to like 2 or 3 people already can't it? (Not a doctor) so if you ask nicely maybe they'll save you a bit?

by InterestingPay 1 day ago

I'm a glutton

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Look, all I'm saying is human livers can regenerate. So if someone wants to cut out a chunk of their own liver and eat it or feed it to someone else, they should be legally allowed to do so. Animal liver is delicious, so human liver probably is too. What, why are you looking at me like that?

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Jesus and vore in the same sentence. We've gone deep

by Amber33 23 hours ago

Gonna be real I'm on a pretty healthy dose of edibles at the moment

by Anonymous 23 hours ago

Fun fact here if you're in the US, constitutionally, your body does not have a right to privacy protected by the 4th amendment after your death. For example, if police want to seize your phone for a search warrant to go through it, or search your home for something, they need a search warrant signed by judge. Otherwise, it's a violation of your 4th amendment right. However, if you die, your stuff can be seized and searched by the government with no paperwork whatsoever.

by Anonymous 23 hours ago

Well that's fine I just don't want them taking out a chunk of my leg and cooking it in a crock pot, that's mine I grew that

by Anonymous 23 hours ago

But you aren't using it anymore...

by InterestingPay 22 hours ago

My skeleton needs it for nourishment so it can hatch

by Anonymous 22 hours ago

I'm scared to ask, but hatch what?

by InterestingPay 22 hours ago

Patience, you'll see ; )

by Anonymous 21 hours ago

RemindMe! When this guy dies "Run."

by InterestingPay 21 hours ago

It's not like they said "no"

by AnywhereHoliday8798 21 hours ago

Many many Christians believe it is a sacred symbolic act, but not some sort of miracle where the bread and wine turn into actual flesh and blood. That's just gross. Jesus said to do it as a way to remember him. He didn't say we would actually eat him. The things people make up just amaze me sometimes.

by Anonymous 21 hours ago

That's not correct. Actually my favorite quote from Jesus Christ is " eat me" -Corinkians 4:20

by Mekhieichmann 20 hours ago

Of course he said it like that. And ordinary people would of course assume he was speaking figuratively. To understand that Jesus meant that piece of bread held in his hand was going to miraculously turn into his human flesh (and they were supposed to eat it!) would require quite a bit more explaining. Remember Jesus also said he was a door.

by Anonymous 20 hours ago

No. If ordinary people assumed He just meant it symbolically, He wouldn't have taught it in John Chapter 6, and the people listening to Him teach wouldn't have found it to be a hard saying to accept. Symbolism is easy to accept for any ordinary person. It's literalism that is difficult. Which means that the ordinary person understood he was being literal. And this is also why we don't admit non-Catholics to take part in the Eucharist, because to take part is to make public your belief in the True Presence, and the Bible says that to take part without believing is a sin.

by Norenekrajcik 20 hours ago

Then don't tell Catholics they're wrong about 2000 years of theology.

by Norenekrajcik 20 hours ago

Okay first of all, the whole thing is made up. Secondly there are (Denominations? Is that the right word? Sects?) who do believe it is literally Jesus' body after it's been blessed. I believe there's more but at least Methodists and Lutherans believe it is literally the body and blood of christ. Possibly some of the orthodox folk as well?

by InterestingPay 19 hours ago

Oh, I'm aware that other denominations believe it. I'm surprised you didn't mention Catholics. I should have also said I'm amazed what people will believe.

by Anonymous 19 hours ago

I didn't mention catholics because I was raised catholic and have kind of forgotten what I was supposed to believe so just tend to ignore they exist out of fear of getting it wrong. No idea why but I find it much easier to remember stuff about all the other kinds of Christian (and none Christians too) than I do to remember what I was taught in Sunday school

by InterestingPay 19 hours ago

Depends on the denomination

by Anonymous 19 hours ago

go ask the pope. It IS his MFING body, and blood. (to quote the pope)

by Mekhieichmann 18 hours ago

You're asking someone to make sense of an organized religion?

by zulaufmyrtis 18 hours ago

If humans are viewed as a food source, it will inevitably lead to them being treated as such while they're still alive. If you have no alternatives (desert island type thing) then I would agree there is nothing morally wrong, but otherwise it's unacceptable.

by jamir10 18 hours ago

Yeah, ideals like those expressed by OP are a pipeline to Soylent Green.

by Alarming-Fix-9585 18 hours ago

It's people!

by Kassulkeemily 18 hours ago

This is the correct answer.

by Few_Agency 17 hours ago

I would say the other exception is respectful funerary cannibalism in which the deceased is honored by being consumed and nourishing the bodies of their loved ones. It can also be a way to have a piece of that person with you forever, which I think is beautiful if it reflects the wishes of the deceased

by Southern_Office 17 hours ago

This is all and well until someone murders because they can't wait for nature/age/accidents to give them their next human barbecue. Also eating someone is a decent way to hide a murder in a culture where cannibalism is fine.

by Anonymous 17 hours ago

No, sorry, that's disgusting. We don't need a reason other than emotion, it's disgusting. Just like incest or beastiality are disgusting

by VastImaginary6376 16 hours ago

I mean that at least some people suddenly have an incentive to make sure people die to provide food.

by jamir10 16 hours ago

Prions

by Morissettejosep 16 hours ago

Don't eat the brains.

by hannahwilkinson 15 hours ago

Thank you!

by felipakovacek 15 hours ago

in a lot of countries, cannibalism itself isn't illegal. even in the US there is no specific law against it. the problem is that it's virtually impossible to legally obtain human meat. if you need to have something amputated yourself you might be able to take whatever it is home if you're very persistent. but you'd have to sign a liability release form at the hospital saying whatever happens is now your responsibility, and laws vary across states. it's meant to be for people who, usually for religious reasons, have to be buried whole.

by Anonymous 15 hours ago

1000% has a body hiding around the house...👀

by Swimming_Pattern_299 14 hours ago

Whaaat nooo of course not!

by felipakovacek 14 hours ago

No, I was talking about myself, 🤣 🤜

by Swimming_Pattern_299 14 hours ago

🤜

by felipakovacek 14 hours ago

Hmmmm Ass Steak on charcoal!!!!!

by Anonymous 13 hours ago

Wagyu A55

by Anonymous 13 hours ago

Yummy! With BBQ sauce in the *.

by Anonymous 13 hours ago

Are we deadass?

by Anonymous 13 hours ago

They aren't eating dead ass

by Inevitable-Passion 13 hours ago

deadass cooked

by Anonymous 12 hours ago

They're eating live ass?

by Anonymous 12 hours ago

Live Ass! Live from the Madison Square Garden.

by Anonymous 12 hours ago

No, we are alive-ass.

by Anonymous 12 hours ago

If the person wanted to be eaten as a sign of respect then sure I can get behind your argument. I think it's safe to assume that most people are against the act of cannibalism, and so as a probability a given person would be more likely to be against the idea of being eaten regardless of the honored intent. By extension, eating such a person would be treating the dead in a way that they found to be disgusting during life, essentially disrespecting a corpse. That's what makes it immoral.

by Anonymous 11 hours ago

Call me crazy but…I'm fine with being eaten when I'm dead.

by felipakovacek 11 hours ago

In that case I don't think it would be immoral for you to be eaten, just kinda gross and unsanitary lmao

by Anonymous 11 hours ago

Unsanitary, its a huge risk of disease. You dont know what disease someone might have, plus prion disease is a big risk.

by Anonymous 11 hours ago

Yeah but that's between the eater and the eatee imo. I'm no expert but I don't think most diseases from cannibalism, like prion diseases, are contagious through other means but I could be wrong. I used "unsanitary" as kind of a joking downplaying of how foul it is.

by Anonymous 11 hours ago

I wouldn't want to be killed to be eaten, but whenever I do die, I hope my biomass can be recycled. Harvest any viable organs and offer the rest to the worms and maggots!

by Anonymous 10 hours ago

What if you just stumbled upon a pretty fresh corpse in the woods? I don't think you should harvest it but what's the harm in just having a little bite if you're so inclined (I'm not) but to each their own 🤷🏻‍♀️

by Anonymous 10 hours ago

Just a lil one. Just a treat.

by Anonymous 10 hours ago

Little snacky snack … protein for the rest of the hike

by Anonymous 10 hours ago

Exactly 👍

by felipakovacek 10 hours ago

I think we'd all get there to survive. I've always wondered would I rather eat my family or have my family eat me. (In a lot of these situations, "food preparation" is anonymous so you don't know who you're eating)

by Anonymous 9 hours ago

Yeah but that's still people, you gotta ask and they aren't very talkative once the soul wriggles out. If you got some sort of ritual or amulet that lets you ask then that's different but I don't typically account for necromancy. And like, ya gotta call it in and they're gonna ask why it has a fresh bite taken out of the ass cheek. Tough to explain that to a detective who you know has seen this before.

by Anonymous 9 hours ago

I would say in that scenario it would be considered grave desecration or mutilation of a corpse which is very frowned upon for multiple reasons. It may violate the wishes of the deceased in multiple different ways including spiritually. While I do think there are cases where cannibalism is completely fine and moral, I think the scenario you've presented could cause harm

by Southern_Office 8 hours ago

This might objectively be the most unpopular opinion.

by Anonymous 8 hours ago

I'll take that as a compliment.

by felipakovacek 8 hours ago

Settle down Hannibal

by Anonymous 7 hours ago

Theres nothing inherently wrong with killing a rat. There is something wrong with killing someone's pet rat.

by Anonymous 7 hours ago

Oh Dahmer was definitely a horrible person.

by felipakovacek 7 hours ago

It is respect for humanity that makes Cannibalism wrong.

by Oreillylucious 7 hours ago

Could it not be respectful to use every part depending on what you believe?

by felipakovacek 6 hours ago

No. See, most people don't want their bodies to be eaten. To very very very few people who do want their bodies to be eaten, fine. But it is inherently immoral to practice cannibalism unless the person being eaten explicitly stated that that was their wish and they consented to it.

by Kyler09 6 hours ago

Morals and respect vary from culture to culture.

by Oreillylucious 6 hours ago

That would imply that common sense doesn't exist. We humans are so brainwashed and used to following along that the most basic things like being human are completely overshadowed by arguing. If you don't wanna get hurt, don't hurt others. If you want to be treated nice, be nice. Rich people rewrote so much in human history that of course the cultural beliefs are twisted and targeting the wrong people. But the basic things, which are called instincts, are still present in everyone. You just gotta sit down and find them yourself. Literally answers the question of "wHaTs ThE meAnInG oF LiFe?" Your very human purpose is buried behind lots and lots of junk. People just too lazy to start digging.

by Anonymous 6 hours ago

So then it's not respect for humanity, but respect for culture.

by Soledad41 5 hours ago

No, It is how my culture respects humanity.

by Oreillylucious 5 hours ago

Idk most cultures are willing to justify murder, torture, etc. of humans for one cause or another, so you're left to wonder how much your culture really respects humanity.

by Soledad41 5 hours ago

Sounds like someone who wants to eat people.

by Shieldsbirdie 4 hours ago

Nah, I wouldn't risk Prions unless I was gonna starve to death.

by felipakovacek 4 hours ago

You're talking generally or just for extreme situations like the plane that crashed in the middle of nothing and survivors had to eat the bodies of their deceased friends? In any case finally an unpopular opinion

by Anonymous 4 hours ago

General and extreme.

by felipakovacek 3 hours ago

That's enough internet for today. Thanks

by Vegetable-Bet9234 3 hours ago

In my opinion it depends on the situation. Across of cannibalism can range from beautiful and poignant, to morally repugnant. Survival cannibalism and Endocannibalism, specifically as part of funerary rites, are examples of cannibalism that I see as completely moral. On the other hand sometimes cannibalism can be used as a tool of genocide, to effectively dehumanize a group of people, and that is morally abhorrent. To elaborate, I think the best example of survival cannibalism practiced in a respectful and moral way is the rugby team that crashed in the Andes some survivors have even said that the idea of their body nourishing their friends made them less scared to die. There is a lot of interesting information about this situation very easily accessible. The worst case scenario morally for cannibalism would be the Guangxi massacre and other similar instances of non famine cannibalism. Cannibalism can become the ultimate way to disrespect and dehumanize victims and it's impact as a serious cultural taboo should not be ignored. The moral implications of each act of cannibalism are tied to the motivations

by Southern_Office 3 hours ago

I 100% agree. And yeah there have been too many instances of white people making up things about Native Americans too justify genocide.

by felipakovacek 2 hours ago

That too! I think if cannibalism itself regardless of context is treated as inherently abhorrent it can give colonizers an excuse to destroy indigenous cultures that they see as savage

by Southern_Office 2 hours ago

Have you been watching Yellowjackets?

by Anonymous 2 hours ago

There are cultures where ritualistic cannibalism was practiced until recently. But you run the risk of infection while doing so, especially by prions like mad cow disease. It is also important to remember that human remains, unlike animal carcass, were once a person, thus deserving to be treated with respect. But theoretically, with the consent of the deceased and their family, it would not be morally awful. Just plain weird

by Anonymous 1 hour ago

Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle. Kant also contributes to this definition. In short, ethics are the values of a determined society on a set time, morals are universal, atemporal values. There is nothing intrisically wrong with cannibalism, there is in our society, in this time. Other people, in other times were comfortable with that.

by TechnologyEcstatic 1 hour ago

So how do morals get determined in this view? And if I can compare any society at any point in time to at least figure out if something is moral or immoral, is there anything that can even be considered morally correct?

by Anonymous 1 hour ago

Well, you gotta read better people than me to answer your question. Go with Aristotle first, its no coincidence we talk about this guy 2500 after his death.

by TechnologyEcstatic 1 hour ago

I will. Thank you, mate!

by Anonymous 1 hour ago

No, just no.

by Cold-Friend-4206 38 minutes ago

Honestly, I agree.

by Anonymous 28 minutes ago

Nope, unless it's a life and death situation, and only as an absolute last resort like your on the brink of dying from starvation... that's the ONLY scenario where it's partially forgivable. The dead are not for human consumption. Throw it in the ocean or in the dirt and let nature do its thing. It's like incest, yeah it's part of the circle of life but you're making that loop a little too narrow and nothing good will come of it.

by Anonymous 12 minutes ago