Freethought & Rationalism Archive

three4jump · 03-19-2002, 11:41 PM

A hypothetical man has been a blood donor for many years, having donated about five gallons of blood over his lifetime. His driver's license says he is an organ donor, and he has left instructions with his family to allow organ harvesting in case of accidental death. He also leaves instructions with his wife that, in the case of his accidental death, he would like his muscles and bones cut up by an agreeable hunter friend and placed in the freezer to be used as meals for his beloved dog. His reason for doing this is probably irrelevant, but that reason is to recycle his body and make good use of it, and also to provide healthy meals for his dog.

He does die in a bicycle accident which leaves him brain-dead but with his organs intact for harvesting. After the liver, eyes, kidneys, some of the skin, the heart and the lungs get hauled off in little coolers to save peoples' lives, the wife claims the body and takes it to the hunter friend to cut up into steaks. Over several months, she cooks up the steaks made of her deceased husband and serves it with rice to their dog, who likes it very much and remains in good health. While she's cooking for her dog, the widow can't help but notice that the cooking meat smells good, and eventually she tries some. It tastes good, she has no bad side effects, and after that she cooks up a little for herself whenever she cooks some for the dog. And they all live happily ever after.

Has anything immoral taken place?

tronvillain · 03-19-2002, 11:45 PM

Nah.

David Gould · 03-20-2002, 12:19 AM

I would give a qualified 'no'. Technically, the widow has not followed the deceased person's wishes. That is the only possible immorality occuring, if you see a breach of that sort as immoral. As the guy is dead, I do not really see that as an issue.

(I mean, if I had told people to give me an ocean burial and they didn't, I could hardly feel aggrieved, being dead and all, now could I? Morality should only come into it where there is harm. it is pretty difficult to harm dead people...)

MadMordigan · 03-20-2002, 12:30 AM

I'd rather eat Johnson, sir.

Danya · 03-20-2002, 12:33 AM

Great story. Reminds me of Mother Goose. Although I find it personally disgusting there is nothing morally wrong with it. The greater good was served.

However,if the husband, in life, had been a strict vegetarian and were against the human consumption of any meat it might be debatable.

Boro Nut · 03-20-2002, 04:09 AM

Personally, regarding tales of eating human flesh, I believe it should be taken with a grain of salt.

Boro Nut

Or apple sauce maybe.

Koyaanisqatsi · 03-20-2002, 05:41 AM

People! Soylent Green is made of people...

three4jump · 03-20-2002, 09:21 AM

<Homer voice> mmmm...Soylent Green <Homer voice>

Queen of Swords · 03-20-2002, 09:59 AM

"This is my body... take and eat, in remembrance of me."

Corwin · 03-20-2002, 10:20 AM

I suppose we're all just strangers in a strange land....

I don't know about the morality of this situation. Personally, I'd put consentual cannibalism in with consentual incest with birth control. The main problem with it is 'it's icky.'

Personally I don't have a problem with both accepting that this is nothing more than cultural conditioning.... and accepting the conditioning. (Sure... it's only 'wrong' because we decided it's icky.... but.... it's still icky.)

03-19-2002, 11:41 PM	#1
three4jump Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Useless Bay Posts: 1,434	cannibalism A hypothetical man has been a blood donor for many years, having donated about five gallons of blood over his lifetime. His driver's license says he is an organ donor, and he has left instructions with his family to allow organ harvesting in case of accidental death. He also leaves instructions with his wife that, in the case of his accidental death, he would like his muscles and bones cut up by an agreeable hunter friend and placed in the freezer to be used as meals for his beloved dog. His reason for doing this is probably irrelevant, but that reason is to recycle his body and make good use of it, and also to provide healthy meals for his dog. He does die in a bicycle accident which leaves him brain-dead but with his organs intact for harvesting. After the liver, eyes, kidneys, some of the skin, the heart and the lungs get hauled off in little coolers to save peoples' lives, the wife claims the body and takes it to the hunter friend to cut up into steaks. Over several months, she cooks up the steaks made of her deceased husband and serves it with rice to their dog, who likes it very much and remains in good health. While she's cooking for her dog, the widow can't help but notice that the cooking meat smells good, and eventually she tries some. It tastes good, she has no bad side effects, and after that she cooks up a little for herself whenever she cooks some for the dog. And they all live happily ever after. Has anything immoral taken place?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-19-2002, 11:45 PM	#2
tronvillain Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 5,658	Nah.

03-20-2002, 12:19 AM	#3
David Gould Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Australia Posts: 759	I would give a qualified 'no'. Technically, the widow has not followed the deceased person's wishes. That is the only possible immorality occuring, if you see a breach of that sort as immoral. As the guy is dead, I do not really see that as an issue. (I mean, if I had told people to give me an ocean burial and they didn't, I could hardly feel aggrieved, being dead and all, now could I? Morality should only come into it where there is harm. it is pretty difficult to harm dead people...)

03-20-2002, 12:30 AM	#4
MadMordigan Beloved Deceased Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 2,704	I'd rather eat Johnson, sir.

03-20-2002, 12:33 AM	#5
Danya Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: USA Posts: 638	Great story. Reminds me of Mother Goose. Although I find it personally disgusting there is nothing morally wrong with it. The greater good was served. However,if the husband, in life, had been a strict vegetarian and were against the human consumption of any meat it might be debatable.

03-20-2002, 04:09 AM	#6
Boro Nut Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Middlesbrough, England Posts: 3,909	Personally, regarding tales of eating human flesh, I believe it should be taken with a grain of salt. Boro Nut Or apple sauce maybe.

03-20-2002, 05:41 AM	#7
Koyaanisqatsi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Yes, I have dyslexia. Sue me. Posts: 6,508	People! Soylent Green is made of people...

03-20-2002, 09:21 AM	#8
three4jump Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Useless Bay Posts: 1,434	<Homer voice> mmmm...Soylent Green <Homer voice>

03-20-2002, 09:59 AM	#9
Queen of Swords Contributor Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Canada. Finally. Posts: 10,155	"This is my body... take and eat, in remembrance of me."

03-20-2002, 10:20 AM	#10
Corwin Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 4,369	I suppose we're all just strangers in a strange land.... I don't know about the morality of this situation. Personally, I'd put consentual cannibalism in with consentual incest with birth control. The main problem with it is 'it's icky.' Personally I don't have a problem with both accepting that this is nothing more than cultural conditioning.... and accepting the conditioning. (Sure... it's only 'wrong' because we decided it's icky.... but.... it's still icky.)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.