Why is cannibalism morally wrong?

What's morally wrong about Armin Meiwes is that for his own gratification, he chose to take advantage of another person who would be considered medically and legally to be of unsound mind, resulting in their death.

What's morally wrong about eating someone's Mother if they died of natural causes or in an accident is the distress it would cause her loved ones.

You could argue that eating anyone under any circumstance is morally wrong due to the anguish it causes to people who find the idea abhorrent (which is quite deeply programmed into most of us, at least socially, as it's rare circumstances that cannibalistic tendency would result in a higher rate of survival) - however, as incidents such as the Rugby team in the Andes proves, this can easily outweighed by the survival instinct. I think anyone would find it very hard to argue that them eating human flesh was wrong.
 
Last edited:
Jason2 said:
Atheists are always telling me as long as two homosexuals are consenting then homosexuality itself is not wrong. I thought very well, and brought to their attention the case of Armin Meiwes. He ate someone who consented to being ate. Yet Armin Meiwes was arrested and sentenced to life imprisonment. I have asked the atheists numerous times to tell me why such an act is wrong if they were both consenting yet I've never heard one give me a good reason why. I can say it's truly wrong from my perspective, but atheists can certainly not, and that is a dangerous viewpoint.
Click to expand...

You're rather conveniently glossing over the fact that Armin Meiwes also killed the man, you cannot legally consent to death except in very limited circumstances i.e. in a recognised centre for euthanasia and the law of the country must permit it in the first place. It's also worth pointing out that in those limited circumstances the person to administer the lethal dose usually has to be the person wishing to die - that is or was the case in regard to the most famous centre which would be Dignitas in Switzerland.

Not incidentally but Armin Meiwes wasn't actually convicted of cannabalism - I don't even know if that is an extant crime in Germany. He was however convicted of manslaughter which was then upgraded to murder at a retrial when the argument was accepted that his victim couldn't have given consent.

Homosexuality and cannabalism share basically nothing in common apart from the fact that you would appear to disagree with both of them, that doesn't make a good basis for an analogy.
 
spoffle said:
The law won't change whether someone wants to do it or not, and it currently being legal doesn't stop people who want to do it, from doing it.

Legal doesn't mean "right", I think more people should learn this.
Click to expand...

I never said it does. The slashes were there as alternatives. I'm not saying right and lawful are the same. I'm saying if it was right or lawful or acceptable etc. As if it was deemed acceptable (say it has been happening for years) then people would be more likely to kill humans for food.
 
Jason2 said:
That brings me to another point: Why is incest wrong?
Click to expand...

See post above

The same could be said regarding incest.

If two adult brothers, both consenting, neither a dominant personality and 100% out of their own free will and desire decide to have an incestual relationship, why is it morally wrong?

You, a Christian, would say it’s against your religion.

An atheist, ??
Click to expand...
 
semi-pro waster said:
You're rather conveniently glossing over the fact that Armin Meiwes also killed the man, you cannot legally consent to death except in very limited circumstances i.e. in a recognised centre for euthanasia and the law of the country must permit it in the first place. It's also worth pointing out that in those limited circumstances the person to administer the lethal dose usually has to be the person wishing to die - that is or was the case in regard to the most famous centre which would be Dignitas in Switzerland.

Not incidentally but Armin Meiwes wasn't actually convicted of cannabalism - I don't even know if that is an extant crime in Germany. He was however convicted of manslaughter which was then upgraded to murder at a retrial when the argument was accepted that his victim couldn't have given consent.

Homosexuality and cannabalism share basically nothing in common apart from the fact that you would appear to disagree with both of them, that doesn't make a good basis for an analogy.
Click to expand...


You are right, Cannabalism isn't a crime in and of itself in most countries...however killing or desecrating a body often are.
 
Jason2 said:
That brings me to another point: Why is incest wrong?
Click to expand...

Aside from the "ick" factor that will underpin many objections it's something which brings a much higher risk of genetic abnormalities in any offspring. You might well also be concerned about parents abusing their normal fiduciary relationship with their children to form a sexual relationship.

In Craterloads' example there would be no offspring to potentially suffer from a lack of genetic variety but it is still something that society would normally condemn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom