|
Post by wetpaint on Nov 26, 2006 20:57:40 GMT -5
When humans die, some of our bodies are destroyed by the same horrific event which causes our death. Fire, water, falling bricks, or whatever the case may be. Our bodies are mutilated beyond recognition. Some of us die of disease, leaving our bodies writhing in germs. But many of us die with our bodies perfectly intact. Approximately 56,597,034 people die each year. Of these, I’d say it is safe to assume that at least half of them leave behind bodies in pristine shape. So what do we do with these bodies? Bury them. Or burn them.
What a waste of resources.
About 6 million people die of hunger each year. We try to give them food, but the government has a hard time justifying spending so much money on feeding the hungry. After all, buying so much food does get to be rather expensive. Food costs money to grow.
But what about the 4244777550 pounds of meat that is produced each year in the form of dead human bodies? It would cost very little to take dead human carcasses and clean them up a little so they could be eaten. Doesn’t it make sense to use old humans to help grow the new? It’s kind of the same principle as recycling.
It would cost a little bit of money to prepare the bodies for consumption, as certain bits of the human body should not be eaten, and it might be a good idea to clean the corpses before eating them. But you would get much more bang for your buck with this method than buying any other type of food for starving people, as the actual food itself can be obtained free of charge, the dead having no real say in the matter.
This may seem morally repulsive to some people. But look at it this way: isn’t it better to eat someone who is already dead than die yourself? Someone dies of hunger every 3.6 seconds. That is a LOT of deaths. Are we willing to let people go on dying when we have a perfectly reasonable way to feed them simply because it breaches etiquette? I certainly hope that we can straighten out our priorities...
Many citizens already agree to be organ donors; is it really that much more of a stretch to donate your entire body?
Think about the children who are starving to death even now as you are reading this. They, too, might shrink away at first from the idea of eating someone’s grandparents. But eventually they will choose this option over dying themselves. All we do with the bodies is bury them anyway. Why not use them to help those in need?
|
|
|
Post by Sgtpepper on Nov 26, 2006 21:19:14 GMT -5
You are deeply sick and twisted, you know that?
Although this would work, people have too many morals and other stuff about them.
I'm not surprised you said this though. You told me last summer that people could rape your dead body for all you cared.
Heheh, you're kinda scary sometimes d00d.
|
|
|
Post by wetpaint on Nov 26, 2006 21:56:08 GMT -5
Morals are inconsequential compared to people's lives. It may offend you, but they are DEAD, it doesn't MATTER what we do to them, they CAN'T FEEL IT. And so many more people will be dead if we DON'T feed them the bodies that the true crime here is inaction.
|
|
|
Post by Sgtpepper on Nov 26, 2006 22:08:18 GMT -5
Heheh, you sound so political.
By morals I mean some people will refuse to eat other humans.
Of course you'll say, "package it so they don't know". Okay do that, but if it leaks out you'll pay hell for all the flak you'll receive from easily offended people. I mean, I know that they're dead, but old habits die really hard. You can't just say "Hey, new idea, let's eat people instead of burying them!"
This is slightly inconsequential but, a diet of human flesh will not be entirely healthy.
Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by wetpaint on Nov 26, 2006 22:34:38 GMT -5
No, by all means, tell them what they are eating. Package it like this: And it would only be the starving people who would eat this. I mean, eating human bodies is healthier than eating nothing. Come on. You can't just say "Hey, new idea, let's eat people instead of burying them!" Hah. Just watch me.
|
|
|
Post by Sgtpepper on Nov 26, 2006 22:37:32 GMT -5
You are deeply sick and strangely hilarious.
And BTW: I'm watchin'.
|
|
|
Post by mauvais on Nov 28, 2006 0:03:26 GMT -5
Wetpaint's solution to World Hunger is rather......interesting, I must say. But he forgets the "God-fearing" point of view and logical reasoning about the dead human body in his effluence.
Loved that picture, though.
|
|
|
Post by Sgtpepper on Nov 28, 2006 0:56:36 GMT -5
You seem to want to disprove or beat out or critisise everything Wetpaint does. He has no morals of course and I don't care if you agree with his (or anyones for that matter) views.
But you should be more open minded.
|
|
|
Post by Sgtpepper on Nov 28, 2006 11:46:58 GMT -5
Is eating humans even healthy.
I mean, even if they die of natural causes, there is still plenty of batteria or viruses. What about some who is immune to some disease they are carrying?
Plus only a few people would want to eat humans even if they're starving. Rigor Mortis would make it like chewing through a rubber tire, wouldn't it, plus, who would want to eat a human butt, or some other part *coughcoughcough*. I think world hunger can be soved more effectively, it's just that most humans are greedy, but there is plenty of food that can go around, without eating humans.
Just a little side thought, Wetpaint, I know you're vegitarian, would you eat humans, or any meat for that matter, if you were starving?
|
|
|
Post by mauvais on Nov 28, 2006 20:15:06 GMT -5
a vegetarian, eh? well....it's hard to be one of those because if you want to get really technical, it would also be 'cruel' to animals to wear clothes or eat a lot of other things besides meat or drive a car or build buildings because doing all those things take away from animals in some way. driving a car also affects humans but we don't care, apparently. humans think they're invincible. indestructible.
mother and i were talking about an indestructible car. i hope they make one by the time i'm old enough to drive. but that might create extra recklessness in teenagers....
i don't criticize everything Wetpaint says. i just dsagree. amendment number 1-against the prohibition the five freedoms. i'm allowed to. he brings up some good points but they're still immoral. God loves the just. and the unjust....
|
|
|
Post by Sgtpepper on Nov 28, 2006 20:23:21 GMT -5
Okay then...
Please don't bring up the amendments again. We just did that in class and it really sucked.
I still think most people should be less quick to reject an opinion of someone else.
|
|
|
Post by wetpaint on Nov 28, 2006 22:30:30 GMT -5
Just a little side thought, Wetpaint, I know you're vegitarian, would you eat humans, or any meat for that matter, if you were starving? Of course. Self-preservation and all that jazz.
|
|
|
Post by wetpaint on Nov 28, 2006 22:32:01 GMT -5
Is eating humans even healthy. It's healthier than eating nothing at all. I'm not saying give human meat to EVERYONE. Just the people who have nothing. Remember, it is 4244777550 pounds a year of COMPLETELY FREE MEAT.
|
|
|
Post by Sgtpepper on Nov 28, 2006 22:33:29 GMT -5
Cool, but seriously man, I don't know how you survive anyways without meat.
Well, i won't go one about it in front of sheltered folk such as yourself, just kiddin'.
"Save a plant, eat a vegetarian!" was a funny bumper sticker I saw once.
|
|
|
Post by wetpaint on Nov 28, 2006 22:33:51 GMT -5
a vegetarian, eh? well....it's hard to be one of those because if you want to get really technical, it would also be 'cruel' to animals to wear clothes or eat a lot of other things besides meat or drive a car or build buildings because doing all those things take away from animals in some way. Indeed, it is sad. But I do what I can. I am not going to base my entire life on not doing ANYTHING that would in ANY WAY harm animals. But that doesn't mean I have to feast on their bleeding dead carcasses.
|
|
|
Post by wetpaint on Nov 28, 2006 22:34:41 GMT -5
Cool, but seriously man, I don't know how you survive anyways without meat. Well, i won't go one about it in front of sheltered folk such as yourself, just kiddin'. "Save a plant, eat a vegetarian!" was a funny bumper sticker I saw once. Also this one: "I'm not a vegetarian because I like animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate plants."
|
|
|
Post by Sgtpepper on Nov 28, 2006 22:36:25 GMT -5
Dude, when is the last time you saw someone eating a dead and STILL BLEEDING carcass, I wouldn't eat something that was still bleeding. Besides, it's not like a chicken is gonna be rocket scientist, it serves society better as a food.
|
|
|
Post by wetpaint on Nov 28, 2006 22:38:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by wetpaint on Nov 28, 2006 22:39:11 GMT -5
Dude, when is the last time you saw someone eating a dead and STILL BLEEDING carcass, I wouldn't eat something that was still bleeding. Okay, I use adjectives to exaggerate my point. So sure me. it's not like a chicken is gonna be rocket scientist, it serves society better as a food. Retarded people aren't rocket scientists either, but we don't eat THEM...
|
|
|
Post by chinchillathekilla on Dec 3, 2006 22:41:59 GMT -5
Dude, when is the last time you saw someone eating a dead and STILL BLEEDING carcass, I wouldn't eat something that was still bleeding. Besides, it's not like a chicken is gonna be rocket scientist, it serves society better as a food. but really, what is "society"? just because humans "rule the world" doesnt mean we are over animals in any way the interwoven web of life without all of it, there is none of it
|
|
|
Post by chinchillathekilla on Dec 3, 2006 22:47:52 GMT -5
a vegetarian, eh? well....it's hard to be one of those because if you want to get really technical, it would also be 'cruel' to animals to wear clothes or eat a lot of other things besides meat or drive a car or build buildings because doing all those things take away from animals in some way. driving a car also affects humans but we don't care, apparently. humans think they're invincible. indestructible.
i am, too. there are more reasons than love of animals that one becomes a vegetarian one is, as it takes 4 times as much water to raise a pound of meat than a pound of grain, or vegetables EVERYTHING needs water to live we cant waste it
|
|
|
Post by Sgtpepper on Dec 3, 2006 23:53:09 GMT -5
Ummm, Chinchilla, one of our threads is called "FREE water".
The Earth won't run out of it.
Besides, if you take meat out of your diet your become slightly malnuorished. Meat was meant to be eaten.
|
|
|
Post by chinchillathekilla on Dec 5, 2006 18:24:57 GMT -5
even if we dont run out of it, there is still only a small amount that we can actually USE
|
|
|
Post by Sgtpepper on Dec 5, 2006 19:47:25 GMT -5
A small percent you mean.
There is TONS and TONS of drinkable water.
Water is not our problem.
|
|
|
Post by wetpaint on Dec 5, 2006 19:52:02 GMT -5
No sgtpepper, but the point chinchilla was trying to make is that it is way CHEAPER and more EFFICIENT to raise veggies than MEAT. However I must say that by far the CHEAPEST option, even better than veggies is HUMAN MEAT. It costs nothing, since the human who lives pays all their own feeding costs until they die, when they are free for the taking. Also they die of natural causes rather than being brutally slaughtered.
So while I am very opposed to eating ANIMALS, I have no problem with HUMAN meat.
|
|