Cannibalism, yay or nay?

Quote:

---

A hive mind? A hive mind implies a self-aware, or at least relatively intelligent power directing the members of this hypothetical hive. (most) Animals are most certainly not members of any such organization.[/b]

---

Animals think in terms of family. Lioness hunts to feed family, not lioness. Birds eat whatever the hell it is they eat and then regurgitate it for their young. If they were driven as individuals, they would act as individuals. The lioness would tell the lion to get off his lazy ass and get his own food.

Quote:

---

*shrug* animals don't care about the survival of their species. They can't even grasp the concept of \"species\". All they care about is their own survival and the survival of their own direct descendants (a good example would be a lion who kills and eats the cubs of another lion who mated with the same lioness as he did, a common occurence in nature).[/b]

---

I think you're underminding the intelligence of animals. If an animal will respond when it's name is called, who's to say it can't become self-aware? In this case, who's to say they're different from us on any level other than shape and brain size?

Quote:

---

An industrial society such as ourself, with no food or energy shortages, can easily afford to burn/bury/dissect/send-into-space/whatever-energy-intensive-process-have-you the corpses. A carnivorous animal, however, is in constant struggle to get more food before it and its offspring starve to death. Thus, the animal would instinctively eat the dead flesh of any of its own kind. To that animal, it's meat - it doesn't care what kind of meat. Animals are NOT picky. You might want to think your arguments through in the future, this one was rediculously easy to turn onto itself Wink


That's the point. We can easily afford to waste stuff on absolutely nothing whatsoever (and we do this very, very often). Animals can't.[/b]

---

Not so fast, there. Animals are picky, there are very few who will eat anything you throw at them, and even fewer who will eat their own species. The way we treat the dead puts a monkey wrench in the gears of nature on a very fundamental level. In nature, we are born from the ground, live off it, and when we die we return to it. In human society this is not the case. If we keep launching our dead toward the sun like you suggest, then since matter can neither be created nor destroyed, all the matter that makes up the earth will eventually be taken up by human corpses. Sure, we could spread out to the farthest reaches of the universe, but since right now we have no prospective planets to move to, and the speed of light limits how fast we can move to any such planets, we really are fighting a losing battle.

Quote:

---

No animal forms societies large enough to do this on the scale you soggest. However, many (even most) animals are highly territorial and easily attack any of its own kind if it wanders too close. I don't see how doing the same thing but on a larger scale somehow constitutes as \"evil\".[/b]

---

you're right. war in itself isn't the problem, it's the reasons we go to war, and the side effects of war. We've turned cities into nuclear wastelands, green fields into cratered deserts because of war. If you sink a ship, the crew dies. However, how much other life dies as a result of all the oil in the fuel reserves? If we simply lined ourselves up and killed each other with our bare hands instead of chemicals and bombs, we'd be helping keep the population under control.

Quote:

---

Natural resources... and who exactly needs those natural resources? I'm talking about the oil, coal, metals etc. Why is it so admirable that there are huge untouched natural resources? Who NEEDS them? The animals? Gaia? Roll Eyes[/b]

---

Exactly, Gaiea doesn't need any of those. Actually when I was talking about natural resources I was referring to how the earth was covered with forests, which were in turn teeming with diverse species. Uncivilized earth was the strongest, most abundant ecosystem ever.

Quote:

---

Nope. We can label any society which keeps a steady population growth \"evil\". That's most of the middle and far east. Oh, and Africa. The west has a stagnant population growth (which some liberal idiots for some reason confuse with cultural stagnation, but let's not get into that), that means it's good.[/b]

---

And yet every year we produce more and more food. Where is this food going? Why, to the growing cultures who have exceeded the population limits of their territories, of course.

Quote:

---

Also, there are plenty of solutions to overpopulation that do not involve any of the things you mentioned. Space colonization, tight birth control, cloning of animal and plant tissue, and that's merely off the top of my head.[/b]

---

Maybe it's just me, but none of those sound very appealing to me. Space colonization? I'd rather die than live in a cold metal shell floating around space. I'd never get to walk in the woods, and I'd be drinking my own recycled piss and sweat. Tight birth control? Let some authoritarian government decide who gets to have children and who doesn't? Let someone deny me the most basic of all natural rights, a right that all life from microbes to humans enjoy: the right to reproduce? Cloning of animal and plant tissue? We still will hit a population maximum, and so this only solves the problem of feeding our huge civilization. This also renders all animal and plant life useless to us, which would spell the end of genetic diversity, the end of evolution, and sooner or later the end of humanity.

Quote:

---

Yep. I bet the still-alive but paralyzed rat that feels itself being slowly crushed in the snake's stomache doesn't really care whether the snake is hungry or not.[/b]

---

This isn't torture, this is eating. The still-living microbes in my stomach don't seem to mind that they're being slowly acid-burned to death.

Quote:

---

Is he capable of distinguishing himself as a separate identity from his surroundings? I could now go on about Freud and stuff, but I'd rather keep the discussion as simple as possible. Suffice to say that self-awarness is simply a full awarness of the existence of oneself as a separate entity. That's at least how I would define it.[/b]

---

I don't see how locomotion is possible without a sense of \"self\" as you're defining it here. Keep trying.

Quote:

---

Also, the animals don't seem to care about killing either humans or each other. I don't know why we should go out of our skin to help them.[/b]

---

If you care about genetic diversity and the future of life, you should care about animals as much as humans. It's only a matter of time before a virus or a change in environment kills off the human race, and if we want intelligent life to ever grace this planet again, we should prepare for such an eventuality.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

A hive mind? A hive mind implies a self-aware, or at least relatively intelligent power directing the members of this hypothetical hive. (most) Animals are most certainly not members of any such organization.

---

Animals think in terms of family. Lioness hunts to feed family, not lioness. Birds eat whatever the hell it is they eat and then regurgitate it for their young. If they were driven as individuals, they would act as individuals. The lioness would tell the lion to get off his lazy ass and get his own food.

---

Huge overgeneralization. The huge majority of animals are solitary, with many not even taking care of their own offspring. Humans, by the way, are also by their nature a social creature, and most apes (nearest human relatives) also tend to live in families and larger groups. The lioness doesn't say anything because she's a dumb machine made of flesh and her programming tells her that she should be doing the hunting, not because she's guided by a higher intelligence that also guides the other members of the family. WTF I can't believe you're seriously suggesting this...

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

*shrug* animals don't care about the survival of their species. They can't even grasp the concept of \"species\". All they care about is their own survival and the survival of their own direct descendants (a good example would be a lion who kills and eats the cubs of another lion who mated with the same lioness as he did, a common occurence in nature).

---

I think you're underminding the intelligence of animals. If an animal will respond when it's name is called, who's to say it can't become self-aware? In this case, who's to say they're different from us on any level other than shape and brain size?

---

Only very certain animals respond to the names we give to them, and then most of them were selectively bred by us to be that way. They are most certainly not self aware. They \"could one day\" become self aware, just like \"I could one day\" become a God, so start worshipping me you filthy heathen! (in case someone didn't get it, we dudge stuff by the way they are at present, not what they \"might\" and \"might not\" one day become. Imagine if people were imprisoned because \"one day\" they might become criminals!)

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

An industrial society such as ourself, with no food or energy shortages, can easily afford to burn/bury/dissect/send-into-space/whatever-energy-intensive-process-have-you the corpses. A carnivorous animal, however, is in constant struggle to get more food before it and its offspring starve to death. Thus, the animal would instinctively eat the dead flesh of any of its own kind. To that animal, it's meat - it doesn't care what kind of meat. Animals are NOT picky. You might want to think your arguments through in the future, this one was rediculously easy to turn onto itself Wink


That's the point. We can easily afford to waste stuff on absolutely nothing whatsoever (and we do this very, very often). Animals can't.

---

Not so fast, there. Animals are picky, there are very few who will eat anything you throw at them, and even fewer who will eat their own species.

---

Nonsense. Most animals would eat absolutely anything you throw at them provided it smells right, often even stuff they can't digest (just try overfeeding fish once). With the exception of domesticated animals which were trained to be that way by humans (ie. dogs not accepting food from strangers).

Quote:

---

The way we treat the dead puts a monkey wrench in the gears of nature on a very fundamental level. In nature, we are born from the ground, live off it, and when we die we return to it. In human society this is not the case. If we keep launching our dead toward the sun like you suggest, then since matter can neither be created nor destroyed, all the matter that makes up the earth will eventually be taken up by human corpses.

---

I hope you're not serious O_o

1) We don't actually launch corpses into the sun, we bury them or cremate them - they return to the ground. The worms usually eat them. See? Nature at work.

2) Even if we did, do you have ANY idea how massive the Earth is? Millions of generations launched into the sun won't put a dent in Earth's mass. By then the human race will not exist as it is today (or at all).

3) Meteorites. There are plenty of micrometeorites impacting Earth's atmosphere every day, adding mass. Earth is not an entirely closed system, just close to closed.

Quote:

---

Sure, we could spread out to the farthest reaches of the universe, but since right now we have no prospective planets to move to, and the speed of light limits how fast we can move to any such planets, we really are fighting a losing battle.

---

Nope. Like I said, colonization of space is not the only solution, by far. I don't really see any losing battle here. We already don't really need oil that much (we keep using it out of convenience, not out of neccessity), we can re-plant a crapload of trees very very fast, we don't really need most animals for our own survival (another species will quickly fill in the ecological niche of any extinct species, or we can repopulate it from genetic stocks), and the best part is that if any serious damage is going to be done to Earth at all, it's gonna be a looong time till then. By then, even more technologies will be developed, leading to even MORE potential solutions. We and Earth are not in any danger. Animals are still dumb robots. Wake up.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

No animal forms societies large enough to do this on the scale you soggest. However, many (even most) animals are highly territorial and easily attack any of its own kind if it wanders too close. I don't see how doing the same thing but on a larger scale somehow constitutes as \"evil\".

---

you're right. war in itself isn't the problem, it's the reasons we go to war, and the side effects of war. We've turned cities into nuclear wastelands, green fields into cratered deserts because of war. If you sink a ship, the crew dies. However, how much other life dies as a result of all the oil in the fuel reserves? If we simply lined ourselves up and killed each other with our bare hands instead of chemicals and bombs, we'd be helping keep the population under control.

---

And we still survive *shrug*. Not only that, but we constantly explore any other option before commiting ourself to war. Oh how horrible we are to try and supress the agressive instincts we (and all other animals) are born with! Animals don't grasp any concept of \"diplomacy\", I assure you. The reasons we go to war, also, are often completely justiifed (just look at Iraq, how many millions more would have died under Saddam's regime...) And again I reffer you to ants.

\"The foreign policy aim of ants can be summed up as follows: restless aggression, territorial conquest, and genocidal annihilation of neighboring colonies whenever possible. If ants had nuclear weapons, they would probably end the world in a week.\" --Journey to the Ants, page 59. Bert Holldobler & Edward O. Wilson

*sigh* the beauty of this quote...

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Natural resources... and who exactly needs those natural resources? I'm talking about the oil, coal, metals etc. Why is it so admirable that there are huge untouched natural resources? Who NEEDS them? The animals? Gaia? Roll Eyes

---

Exactly, Gaiea doesn't need any of those. Actually when I was talking about natural resources I was referring to how the earth was covered with forests, which were in turn teeming with diverse species. Uncivilized earth was the strongest, most abundant ecosystem ever.

---

The strongest ever... well, I suppose you're right, it did have a strong competition from ecosystems of other planets, and it... oh wait! Earth is the only planet that HAS an ecosystem! But that aside, Earth didn't have skyscrapers before humans. There.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Nope. We can label any society which keeps a steady population growth \"evil\". That's most of the middle and far east. Oh, and Africa. The west has a stagnant population growth (which some liberal idiots for some reason confuse with cultural stagnation, but let's not get into that), that means it's good.

---

And yet every year we produce more and more food. Where is this food going? Why, to the growing cultures who have exceeded the population limits of their territories, of course.

---

The food is going to the ones who can afford to buy it. If the poor poor third world countries want some of that food, why won't they get off their lazy butts for a change, kick out the dictators, elect good leaders, and get a capitalistic economy going so they can afford all the food they WANT? But noooo going into civil wars over whose religious sect is superior sounds like a so much better idea...

I don't understand why some people expect food to magically fall from the sky for them without expecting to do any real effort... seriously, want some food? Don't sell your agricultural products to others if you have food shortages. And distribute them among the population properly. And STOP YOUR POPULATION GROWTH. Seriously, I don't see at all why the west owes ANYTHING to those backwards nations.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Also, there are plenty of solutions to overpopulation that do not involve any of the things you mentioned. Space colonization, tight birth control, cloning of animal and plant tissue, and that's merely off the top of my head.

---

Maybe it's just me, but none of those sound very appealing to me. Space colonization? I'd rather die than live in a cold metal shell floating around space. I'd never get to walk in the woods, and I'd be drinking my own recycled piss and sweat.

---

*shrug* fine, live on Earth while others, who preffer the beautiful view out of the window than some funny-smelling \"woods\", rain, biting insects and murderous gravity, will live in space.

Quote:

---

Tight birth control? Let some authoritarian government decide who gets to have children and who doesn't? Let someone deny me the most basic of all natural rights, a right that all life from microbes to humans enjoy: the right to reproduce?

---

Suuuure because it is common knowledge that ONLY authoritarian governments have laws and regulations :rolleyes: But I'd rather cope with a 2 children only limitat (like the one in effect today in China) than with a global population boom.

Quote:

---

Cloning of animal and plant tissue? We still will hit a population maximum, and so this only solves the problem of feeding our huge civilization. This also renders all animal and plant life useless to us, which would spell the end of genetic diversity, the end of evolution, and sooner or later the end of humanity.

---

...You lost me here. HOW does cloning plants and animals magically stops diversion and evolution? We will have multiple genetic stocks which we will randomly pair-up for cloning... viola, diversity.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Yep. I bet the still-alive but paralyzed rat that feels itself being slowly crushed in the snake's stomache doesn't really care whether the snake is hungry or not.

---

This isn't torture, this is eating. The still-living microbes in my stomach don't seem to mind that they're being slowly acid-burned to death.

---

But it's an inhumane feeding. Those inhumane snakes, quick, somebody put them in isolation and feed them only bonzo! Ahem, anyway, I don't see what you're getting at.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Is he capable of distinguishing himself as a separate identity from his surroundings? I could now go on about Freud and stuff, but I'd rather keep the discussion as simple as possible. Suffice to say that self-awarness is simply a full awarness of the existence of oneself as a separate entity. That's at least how I would define it.

---

I don't see how locomotion is possible without a sense of \"self\" as you're defining it here. Keep trying.

---

Ever seen a programmed robot on wheels? :rolleyes:

And read some Freud, my friend. Specifically, about the Ego, Super Ego, and Id. Self awarness is NOT something trivial.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Also, the animals don't seem to care about killing either humans or each other. I don't know why we should go out of our skin to help them.

---

If you care about genetic diversity and the future of life, you should care about animals as much as humans. It's only a matter of time before a virus or a change in environment kills off the human race, and if we want intelligent life to ever grace this planet again, we should prepare for such an eventuality.

---

Nonsense. First of all, it's not our bussiness if intelligent life will ever appear here or not. It IS, however, our business to exploit the ONLY advantage we were given by evolution over any other animals, and that's intelligence and self awareness. We do that by pushing the technological limits further and further, and that requires a significant industrial base. The animals are suffering? Tough shit, they better take up arms against us or turn around and bend over. We are the only species to ever reach self awarness and with the potential to unlock the mysteries of the universe, and we're NOT going to blow this chance by pulling back from inflicting the same kind of damage to animals as they constantly keep inflicting upon each other.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by wicked+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(wicked)</div>

Quote:

---

Huge overgeneralization. The huge majority of animals are solitary, with many not even taking care of their own offspring. Humans, by the way, are also by their nature a social creature, and most apes (nearest human relatives) also tend to live in families and larger groups. The lioness doesn't say anything because she's a dumb machine made of flesh and her programming tells her that she should be doing the hunting, not because she's guided by a higher intelligence that also guides the other members of the family. WTF I can't believe you're seriously suggesting this...
[/b]

---

Human by nature... hmm free will what? Where?
Lioness may not understand the great “why” but she does understand how. Just like the human race the most powerful and advanced “dumb flesh machine” I know. Just because we can sit and wonder beyond are already preprogramed frame of existence, which in itself might be a part of overall programming of the human psyche, doesn’t mean we have any right to look down on any thing that beats with blood flow or whos brain flickers with the light of life.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by wicked+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(wicked)</div>

Quote:

---

Nonsense. Most animals would eat absolutely anything you throw at them provided it smells right, often even stuff they can't digest (just try overfeeding fish once). With the exception of domesticated animals which were trained to be that way by humans (ie. dogs not accepting food from strangers).
[/b]

---

Nature! Survival! The need to exist! TO LIVE! That’s why they eat anything they can. And the majority of animals will only eat when hungry and only resort to eating something out of their own everyday diet when they are starving. And this thread is a perfect example of how humanity with its thought is the same way.

<!--QuoteBegin-wicked@


And we still survive *shrug*.

---

So do cockroaches and Twinkies.

<!--QuoteBegin-wicked


Not only that, but we constantly explore any other option before commiting ourself to war. Oh how horrible we are to try and supress the agressive instincts we (and all other animals) are born with! Animals don't grasp any concept of \"diplomacy\", I assure you. The reasons we go to war, also, are often completely justiifed (just look at Iraq, how many millions more would have died under Saddam's regime...) And again I reffer you to ants.

---

Sure they don’t understand diplomacy but they do understand leadership and the following of some one stronger. The barbaric means in which the leaders are chosen are almost identical to early man. Hm which came first the need for power or the want?
And how many millions will die under the democracy? Will my son die there? Will I? How many more terrorists will be born out of the hate we bring with us? How many generations will feel the sting of insecurity on foreign soil just for being american? Let other humans hunt and slaughter us like game for our policy’s.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by wicked


The food is going to the ones who can afford to buy it. If the poor poor third world countries want some of that food, why won't they get off their lazy butts for a change, kick out the dictators, elect good leaders, and get a capitalistic economy going so they can afford all the food they WANT? But noooo going into civil wars over whose religious sect is superior sounds like a so much better idea...

---

OOO, I like this one! This has oodles of stuff!
1. Ever hear of a caste system?
2. Elect good leaders? Like ours? LOL... the last good leader I remember was Jesus and all that prophet got was a one way ticket to the afterlife(assuming you believe in that kind of thing).
3. Capitalism is the very father of evil. It teaches to want and ignore need. Ignore the pain cause you have a 56\" plasma TV and an iPod. Believe it or not wholeness cannot be bought.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by wicked+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(wicked)</div>

Quote:

---

I don't understand why some people expect food to magically fall from the sky for them without expecting to do any real effort... seriously, want some food? Don't sell your agricultural products to others if you have food shortages. And distribute them among the population properly. And STOP YOUR POPULATION GROWTH. Seriously, I don't see at all why the west owes ANYTHING to those backwards nations.
[/b]

---

The only thing those people expect are compassion. The same compassion we would show some one that lives in our own country. Im sure if they could afford to keep their stuff they would. But alas not every country is blessed with the great leadership that would start wars to jumpstart economies. And the west doesnt owe anything to them.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by wicked+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(wicked)</div>

Quote:

---

Nonsense. First of all, it's not our bussiness if intelligent life will ever appear here or not.
[/b]

---

Thats right... and im sure if it ever did people like you would make sure it was a short appearance after feeling threatened.

<!--QuoteBegin-wicked@

It IS, however, our business to exploit the ONLY advantage we were given by evolution over any other animals, and that's intelligence and self awareness.

---

LOL now who’s being broad! Intelligence pppffffttttt! Worthless to those who have no understanding of the basics such as compassion, oneness and selflessness. And knowing ones self also means nothing to some one that knows nothing of his place in the world and the ways he effects it.

<!--QuoteBegin-wicked


The animals are suffering? Tough shit, they better take up arms against us or turn around and bend over. We are the only species to ever reach self awarness and with the potential to unlock the mysteries of the universe, and we're NOT going to blow this chance by pulling back from inflicting the same kind of damage to animals as they constantly keep inflicting upon each other.

---

They wont have to take up arms. Those of us that have compassion for their suffering will. ELF FTW!!!! And we are already blowing our chance by following those who wish to poison the very vessel that carries us through space. Destroying life that may some day aid us in the discovery of why we are here. ALL WHILE constantly inflicting damage to each other like 2 males of the same pride battling for control. Ever locked in the uncontrolled downward spiral that originated from the human beings that, like you, seem to think that life and this world is expendable.

But I guess I should thank you for 2 reasons. You made me think about renouncing a few things in my life. My willingness to eat another human being and my vow of pacifism.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wicked
Is he capable of distinguishing himself as a separate identity from his surroundings?

---

There are monkeys/apes that can do so, yes.
One in particular would be shown a model of his room, and a ball was placed in the model. The chimp would then walk right up to the ball in his room and pick it up.
Or how about the chimp that could relate to a mirror representation of himself. They put a red dot on her, showed her a mirror, and after looking at it searched her face for the dot.

They are able to conceptualise their environment and themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Placebo

There are monkeys/apes that can do so, yes.
One in particular would be shown a model of his room, and a ball was placed in the model. The chimp would then walk right up to the ball in his room and pick it up.
Or how about the chimp that could relate to a mirror representation of himself. They put a red dot on her, showed her a mirror, and after looking at it searched her face for the dot.

They are able to conceptualise their environment and themselves.

---

I know that chimps can, that's why IMO, animals who ARE self aware should be made a special exception. Although it doesn't mean they should be treated as well as humans.

Quote:

---

Human by nature... hmm free will what? Where?
Lioness may not understand the great “why” but she does understand how. Just like the human race the most powerful and advanced “dumb flesh machine” I know. Just because we can sit and wonder beyond are already preprogramed frame of existence, which in itself might be a part of overall programming of the human psyche, doesn’t mean we have any right to look down on any thing that beats with blood flow or whos brain flickers with the light of life.

---

She doesn't understand how, just like a 1 month old baby doesn't understand how he should supposed to suck onto his mommy's titties - he just does, instinctively. Because we are not bound to anything by our free (yes, FREE) will, means we have a responsibility to fullful the full potential of this ability. This ability, by the way, is not part of any programming. Please show me someone INSTINCTIVELY capable of building a spear, lighting fire etc. without any conscious designing involved. We are NOT programmed for technology, we have achieved it thanks to our overwhelming intelligence.

Oh, and we have the \"right\" to do anything we friggin' feel like doing in this world. I never quite understood this \"you don't have any right!\" thing. Who exactly decides what rights do we have? We CAN therefore we WILL. If possible, it would be nice to avoid damage to the ecology. If not, steammroll it. Simple as that.

And the human race is not any more advanced than any mammal (if by \"advanced\" we mean \"complex\"). We are a flesh machine that IS NOT DUMB! That's the whole point!

Quote:

---

Nature! Survival! The need to exist! TO LIVE! That’s why they eat anything they can. And the majority of animals will only eat when hungry and only resort to eating something out of their own everyday diet when they are starving. And this thread is a perfect example of how humanity with its thought is the same way

---

Sure, that's perfectly true, so we agree on this (including cannibalism among animals I presume). Your point?

Quote:

---

So do cockroaches and Twinkies

---

Don't tell me you've read that stupid fanfic on FictionPress.com... or is it from somewhere else? Anyway, that's true. Your point?

Quote:

---

Sure they don’t understand diplomacy but they do understand leadership and the following of some one stronger. The barbaric means in which the leaders are chosen are almost identical to early man. Hm which came first the need for power or the want?
And how many millions will die under the democracy? Will my son die there? Will I? How many more terrorists will be born out of the hate we bring with us? How many generations will feel the sting of insecurity on foreign soil just for being american? Let other humans hunt and slaughter us like game for our policy’s.

---

...I don't see how you turned an explanation of how animal leaders are chosen (you forgot to mention that this happens only in certain social animals and is almost universally based on the physical size and power of the leader) to a whine/moan fest about poor poor victim America which can't defend itself from the evil foreigners with its military whose navy is bigger than all the world's navies combined, and whose military spendings are identical to the whole world's combined spending on their militaries and still constitutes merely 5% of their GDP (not that it's a bad thing, good for America yay, I just don't see how your whining makes any sense).

Quote:

---

OOO, I like this one! This has oodles of stuff!
1. Ever hear of a caste system?

---

Relevancy?

Quote:

---

2. Elect good leaders? Like ours? LOL... the last good leader I remember was Jesus and all that prophet got was a one way ticket to the afterlife(assuming you believe in that kind of thing).

---

Suuure that's why you sit comfortably in your soft chair in front of the computer, enjoying luxuries not heard of by KINGS of past eras, instead of raping some virgins in Africa to try and cure yourself from AIDS. :rolleyes: Bitching about your \"horrible, horrible\" country is easy from the armchair.

Quote:

---

3. Capitalism is the very father of evil. It teaches to want and ignore need. Ignore the pain cause you have a 56\" plasma TV and an iPod. Believe it or not wholeness cannot be bought.

---

Capitalism is the very mother of good. It teaches to fullfil your potential, reach out into the depths of your soul and realize your abilities to their fullest, while allowing everyone an equal opportunity to do so.

Or, in a sane man's words - capitalism doesn't \"teach\" anything you idealistic twonk, it's an economical system O_o A system that happens to create the healthiest, happiest countries around. EVERY other alternative has been a complete and catastrophic failure. Millions have died under other systems, but not under capitalism. Capitalism encourages individuality, the right of every man to struggle and reach great achievements. It is every man's personal perogative whether he cares about lazy bums that won't find themselves jobs because they like a parasitic lifestyle, or not.

This \"56 inch TV\" nonsense is materialism, not capitalism. I also don't think it's bad, and I'd REALLY like to hear how buying yourself a nice TV to enjoy watching movies on a big screen is The Father of All EEEEEEVVIIIIIIL [/ominous voice] (Oh and while you're at it, explain what kind of \"pains\" it \"teaches\" us to ignore and why)

Quote:

---

The only thing those people expect are compassion. The same compassion we would show some one that lives in our own country. Im sure if they could afford to keep their stuff they would. But alas not every country is blessed with the great leadership that would start wars to jumpstart economies. And the west doesnt owe anything to them.

---

Ever heard of International Aid? We send them food, medical equipment, the works. Their leaders instantly confiscate all of this. BILLIONS of dollars (taxpayer's money, of course) have DISSAPEARED into Africa without ANY effect. That's more than enough compassion. You'd expect a common man to throw a couple of coins into the beggar's hat, you don't expect him to buy him a HOUSE!!?

So, there you have it, we showed them more than enough compassion. The ball is in their court.

And what leadership exactly started a war to jumpstart economies? (Clue: Don't say Bush unless you want to get owned in a debate).

Quote:

---

Thats right... and im sure if it ever did people like you would make sure it was a short appearance after feeling threatened

---

Not really, there's actually some kind of very rare ape (not chimps, rarer and smarter) that actually has a written language of symbols! They exist TODAY, they have also been studied. They'd take 2nd place in a planetary intelligence contest. I don't see the military throwing napalm into their habitats. But of course, the paranoid one here is YOU, the guy who thinks an environment of free trade and competition is the father of evil :rolleyes:

Oh and it's STILL not our responsibility to \"prepare the Earth for a return visit of sentient life\" or something.

Quote:

---

LOL now who’s being broad! Intelligence pppffffttttt! Worthless to those who have no understanding of the basics such as compassion, oneness and selflessness. And knowing ones self also means nothing to some one that knows nothing of his place in the world and the ways he effects it.

---

...I'm sorry but after this post I have no choise but to conclude that your brain has finally died. Knock knock? Compassion, \"oneness\" (if you even know what that is yourself) and selfishness all stem from intelligence, not vice versa. Intelligence is the \"basics\". Intelligence has allowed us to achieve so much, not any \"compassion\" or \"oneness\". And I know my place in the world perfectly. I know who I am, what I like, what are my strengths and weaknesses, my likes and dislikes... I know my place in the world, both physical, functional, historical. Most highschool graduates will have that. Unless you're talking about some \"destiny\" spiritual bullshit, in which case don't bother, I don't listen.

(by the way, of the three you've mentioned, wild animals recognize only the last one).

Quote:

---

They wont have to take up arms. Those of us that have compassion for their suffering will. ELF FTW!!!! And we are already blowing our chance by following those who wish to poison the very vessel that carries us through space. Destroying life that may some day aid us in the discovery of why we are here. ALL WHILE constantly inflicting damage to each other like 2 males of the same pride battling for control. Ever locked in the uncontrolled downward spiral that originated from the human beings that, like you, seem to think that life and this world is expendable.

---

In other words, you're siding with wacko eco-terrorists. So, you're a nutjob. Did it ever occur to you that animals today aren't suffering any worse than they ever did? They constantly inflict damage on each other indiscriminately, often entire ecologies go bang because some species starts to breed uncontrollably.

And the sane of us already know why we (meaning the human race) are here. I'll let you discover that one on your own (clue: prepare to be dissapointed).

Quote:

---

But I guess I should thank you for 2 reasons. You made me think about renouncing a few things in my life. My willingness to eat another human being and my vow of pacifism.

---

Excellent! Forget about cannibalism and pacifism. Hang out with your terrorist friends, "free" the Earth, and get arrested for an empty cause. In the meabwhile I'll be raising a toast for your well-being from Mars or an orbital space station, or some other miracle of human inginuety.

Yay. What is so special about cows. If I wouldn't have food I wouldn't mind eating people. It tastes like pork I heard ^__^.

Only most people are loved more by other people then the average cow. Therefor eating other human being in this current situation is a bit of a trouble.

I wouldn't hesitate to eat another person if I had to, and I would expect others to eat me if they had to. But I wouldn't do it for the experience, maybe in a dream though.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wicked+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wicked)</div>

Quote:

---

No, because they are not self aware. They don't CARE whether you eat them or not, they are automatons of flesh and bone. As far as I'm concerned, if they're not self-aware, morals don't extend onto them. Furthermore, animals kill each other all the time, this is trivial in nature. That gives us natural permission to kill all we want. Now why we can't each other, that's largely a cultural taboo, although every single culture had and has this at one form or another - most humans have basic disdain from killing a fellow human/sentient. Animals are fleshy sac programmed to hunt each other and eat grass mindlessly. Who cares.[/b]

---

<!--QuoteBegin-Wicked
Nonsense. First of all, it's not our bussiness if intelligent life will ever appear here or not. It IS, however, our business to exploit the ONLY advantage we were given by evolution over any other animals, and that's intelligence and self awareness. We do that by pushing the technological limits further and further, and that requires a significant industrial base. The animals are suffering? Tough shit, they better take up arms against us or turn around and bend over. We are the only species to ever reach self awarness and with the potential to unlock the mysteries of the universe, and we're NOT going to blow this chance by pulling back from inflicting the same kind of damage to animals as they constantly keep inflicting upon each other.

---

I'm going to go into complete denial and tell myself that you're just trying to get a reaction out of people and that's why you're posting this bullshit. I'm not one to get into a huge snit and put people down when they say stupid shit, but the things you've written are the lamest piece of garbage I've heard in years. YEARS. "....natural permission to kill all we want.'' ????????????? Uh, yeah. Anyway.

And stop saying they aren't self-aware. You don't know that, so stop saying it. They have their own interest in life and survival. And if they're tortured they feel pain. They DO care if you eat them. Moron.

I hope reincarnation is something that really happens and you come back as a cow or pig in a slaughterhouse or an animal being skinned alive. And I hope I come back as a meat eating, fur wearing asshole.

Anyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyway............

Do you realize how incredibly hot you are when you rant? I'd eat you anytime! :ohyahbaby:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by InTheMoment
Do you realize how incredibly hot you are when you rant? I'd eat you anytime! :ohyahbaby:

---

Heh. Now there's a situation where I don't mind eating a fellow human!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by InTheMoment
Do you realize how incredibly hot you are when you rant? I'd eat you anytime! :ohyahbaby:

---

I'm............flattered?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kichu


I'm............flattered?

---

And tasty, I'm sure.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by InTheMoment

And tasty, I'm sure.

---

Maybe a little spicy.

Subtle. Very subtle ;)

This is a whole lot of talk about nothing. I'm against cannibalism myself, but if put into a situation where it was my only option other than death then I'm not sure what I might do.

Oh come off it! "yay... pass the ketchup!" is only one point behind? You guys are monsters. Keep up the good work. :D

I've seen way too many cannible movies (Wrong Turn, Wrong Turn 2, Sweeney Todd, etc.) To be able to do that. Unless of course, apocolyptic thing and such happened. Even then, id close my eyes, hold my breath, and make someone else cook it for me.
Unless i was the last person on earth (I Am Legend) and then i would just proceed to starve

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dangeruss

yes, humans are self aware, therefore they should be eaten. All the evils of man stem from his being self-aware. I like my humans much the same way you like your steak: bloody, damn near body temperature, and preferably screaming in terror.

---

You have no life. You're in pathological need of attention - so much so that you post this stupid little I'm-a-tough-guy post to some scary-ass topic on some godforsaken forum. You use gore and graphics to make up for the fact that you're talking out of your ass as well as trying, desperately, with the very worst of wit and bravado, to make up for the fact that you have no strength of character whatsoever.

I mean, come on - "...bloody, damn near body temprature, and preferably screaming in terror". Because you just love torture, your tough, you're butch, you're strong, someone being eaten wouldn't bother you, would it? You're so fake! This is PATHETIC.


Sorry if that seemed a bit strong (not you, Dangeruss, good grief, your name's even "Dangeruss", you deserved that - everyone else). You're all sickos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levi1057

Serial killers/cannibals say there is nothing like it. It’s the best tasting meat in existence.

---

i heard that too, but i'm skeptical. it could be just because eating human meat is so taboo that finally trying some would make it seem tastier than it actually is, know what i'm saying? :?

sorry. i meant, if cannibalism was legal then maybe we wouldn't think so much of it.

however, our diet is a lot tastier than a cow's, but i'm not sure how that factors into it...

btw, dogs are supposed to taste really good. and cats taste like shit.

Why was this thread revived?

Come on, let it die again, please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

Why was this thread revived?

Come on, let it die again, please.

---

Sorry, had to answer this thread and had to vote yay - I'm hungry.

Cannabalism: the solution to overpopulation and world hunger! =D

I couldn't bring myself to eat another human. It may be for entirely psychological reasons. It makes me churn inside. Also, I doubt his/her family would appreciate knowing that the person's death served merely as a meal.

Sometimes pig meat reminds me of human flesh :barf:

but Cannabalism could solve the homeless issue.

i would try it, as long as it was perfectly legal.

Edit: Actually I eat cannibals