whats your stance? right or wrong? neither? why or why not?
I mostly question matters of consent over it, otherwise it's more of a matter of us not tasting very good without a lot of effort put behind it.
Also the availability of consensual human meat seems scarce.
I mostly question matters of consent over it, otherwise it's more of a matter of us not tasting very good without a lot of effort put behind it.
Also the availability of consensual human meat seems scarce.
it is scarce, but in my opinion in less someone who is a mentally sane non drunk nor drugged adult says to eat them after they die and it can be proven, then i have no say in the decisions of others and nor should anyone as long as no one else has been harmed.
What person will be seen as "mentally sane" over letting me eat them?
That at it's very least goes into "desire to harm themselves or others".
i feel deciding what happens to your body after death is never self harm, no matter how unusual. in cremation your body is burned, but is that self harm? no! the person is dead. Disney had his head frozen and he seemed pretty functional in life. what is important is, its their body, so its their say on what happens after they die as long as they dont harm others.
no because that would be someone wanting to mutilate themselves or have someone else mutilate them, and at that point they must go to a hospital to be under watch right away to make sure they are alright. so i would advise calling the hospital in that case.
no because that would be someone wanting to mutilate themselves or have someone else mutilate them, and at that point they must go to a hospital to be under watch right away to make sure they are alright. so i would advise calling the hospital in that case.
There's ways to keep someone alive while eating them without them bleeding out.
i have been laughing this whole time XD its like we are debating in a playful way by being goofy
"no, no eating people alive"
my husband is cracking up