|
Post by Tar A on Mar 10, 2004 0:46:42 GMT -5
Today's issue for our communal puppet, please feel free to lodge your vote and participate in the debate. (Dilemma #88) - "Cannibals Demand to Taste What The New Pacific Order Has to Offer" The IssueA coalition of tribalists, health experts, and civil rights proponents have recently suggested legalizing cannibalism for consumers of willing would-be meals. The Debate- Option 1: "I see absolutely no problem with people digging into each other at dinnertime, so long as everyone is willing," Elizabeth Longbottom, the editor of the monthly magazine 'To Serve Man', quips, "Not only does it solve hunger problems and create jobs, but it also adds variety to The New Pacific Order's sometimes dull palette."
- Option 2: Civil rights leader Buy Broadside came out publicly for moderate pro-cannibalism legislation, commenting, "While it may strike some as a crude, even evil practice, our ancestors have practiced cannibalism for years. If we create a government organization to strictly regulate and grade all human meat prior to its arrival on the market, we can ensure that respect for diversity is maintained while health concerns are also allayed. And instead of killing average people, why not make being turned into snack foods a post-mortem option? Like donating your body to science!"
- Option 3: "You're all absolutely out of your minds!" exclaims Roxanne Hamilton, head of The New Pacific Order's largest health-food manufacturer. "It's immoral, it's unhealthy, and it's disgusting. Not only are these so-called 'dietary rights' activists leading us down a dark path of sin, but right into a marketplace with yet another product that's almost as bad as beef!"
#nosmileys
|
|
|
Post by mussolandia on Mar 10, 2004 15:09:25 GMT -5
Ughhhh! Nasty business!
|
|
|
Post by Turbomut on Mar 10, 2004 15:50:22 GMT -5
I Have to agree
|
|
|
Post by Jennivier on Mar 10, 2004 16:52:10 GMT -5
Nast business indeed, but I see no problem. As long as everyone is willing, the people should be allowed to carry out their eating habbits, though rather questionable. I try and keep the government out of things, and give the people the freedom to go about their lives, and rise or fall on their own merits. I vote option 1.
|
|
|
Post by mussolandia on Mar 10, 2004 21:21:51 GMT -5
My dear Jennivier
There is something we call "human dignity" and as cannibalism (whether voluntary or not) represents a blatant violation of human dignity, it must not be allowed. I understand my country profile does not really allow me to invoke this principle, but it is the msot evident way I can support my case.
The thought of men eating each other is gruesome (just think about Fat Bastard: "Baby is what's for dinner!). Being killed is a much higher injury to personal freedoms and civil rights than not being able to offer your (aarghh!) services.
|
|
Unlimited
Senator / Pacific Surveyor of Foreign Threat
Vanguard of the Pacific Revolution
Posts: 694
|
Post by Unlimited on Mar 10, 2004 21:30:21 GMT -5
What if the person chooses to be killed? And since when did a government have the right to force "dignity" on its citizens?
|
|
|
Post by Jennivier on Mar 10, 2004 21:47:22 GMT -5
There's no question of dignity when it's completly optional. You're not being forced into a "meal", but rather the choice is being offered to the general public. If one chooses to do so, then there is no problem. Dignity is the eye of the beholder, as with all other emotions.
|
|
|
Post by LadyRebels on Mar 10, 2004 21:53:13 GMT -5
Well I won't vote on this one, considering I am not a true member of this region, but this is the first time, in almost a year of playing that I have seen this issue.
Yuck, but in some cultures it is believed that when a person dies, eating the flesh of said person is a way of honoring their memories, by letting them provide the very essence of life. Food for the living. Hard to wrap my mind around that concept, but it is their own belifs and not mine. Just thought I would say something about that.
|
|
|
Post by Mammothistan on Mar 10, 2004 22:02:20 GMT -5
Except in cases of disaster (the voyage of the Essex, for example) and Germans, cannibalism is considered pretty much wiped out in the world.
|
|
Unlimited
Senator / Pacific Surveyor of Foreign Threat
Vanguard of the Pacific Revolution
Posts: 694
|
Post by Unlimited on Mar 10, 2004 22:16:00 GMT -5
Does that make it wrong?
|
|
|
Post by LadyRebels on Mar 10, 2004 23:42:17 GMT -5
True it could be gone from the modern day world as we know it, but in Africa they still had tribes that followed the practice until recently. I am not sure if they still do or not.
Ok think of this for a moment........
You are trapped with a group of people in the middle of a mountain range durning winter, food is gone, if someone was to die due to exposer, no murder, what would you do? die, or maybe just maybe you would eat the meat/flesh to live?
I myself can not truly answer that question, and I hope and pray I never have to. But will the will to live overcome the beliefs that you hold right now at this very moment? Something to think about.......
|
|
Unlimited
Senator / Pacific Surveyor of Foreign Threat
Vanguard of the Pacific Revolution
Posts: 694
|
Post by Unlimited on Mar 10, 2004 23:47:51 GMT -5
This is talking about casual dinner for two. Not survival eating while trapped in the middle of a mountain range.
|
|
|
Post by Tar A on Mar 11, 2004 0:17:49 GMT -5
There's no question of dignity when it's completly optional. You're not being forced into a "meal", but rather the choice is being offered to the general public. If one chooses to do so, then there is no problem. Dignity is the eye of the beholder, as with all other emotions. I have to disagree... it is not the individual, but society who defines 'dignity' here. It is society who is having cannibalism forced on it, it isn't really about choice. Well I won't vote on this one, considering I am not a true member of this region, but this is the first time, in almost a year of playing that I have seen this issue. Well... you're a member of the boards, an active one at that. Vote if you want to! And this is a very new issue, one of the latest edited by reploid... it's been in the system for maybe a couple of weeks. You are trapped with a group of people in the middle of a mountain range durning winter, food is gone, if someone was to die due to exposer, no murder, what would you do? die, or maybe just maybe you would eat the meat/flesh to live? I can unhesitatingly say that I wouldn't. I don't have the mental ability to kill someone, I really don't think I could. Besides, I don't fear death. (Sure, I can say that sitting in front of a comfortable computer, but I really don't. If it was between both having to do something I really think I can't plus totally disregarding the moral system I live by, or death... I don't think I'd have that big a problem with death.) I don't have the heart to close this thread, lol, tis far too interesting a debate.
|
|
|
Post by LadyRebels on Mar 11, 2004 1:20:47 GMT -5
I know that it is stated as a causal dinner for two, and that is a little to Hannibal Lecter for my liking.
But what I am trying to show here is the fact that you can not say for certain that you would/could ever do this gross and unholy act.
I don't say kill, not by any means, there are a few things in this world I would kill for or over, and I love all three of them dearly.
But I would never just kill someone for pleasure or to consume their flesh, but it the circustmances were set up differently, can you say that if someone died of natural causes, that you would not eat the flesh to perhaps stay alive long enough to be rescued?
It is thoughts such as these that drove me to learn how to surive, in theroy at this point, in extreme conditions.
|
|
Sir Paul
Senator / Director of the Pacific Press
This is PNN
Posts: 617
|
Post by Sir Paul on Mar 11, 2004 1:35:16 GMT -5
Would you like some chicken? It takes of baby!
|
|