Why are Atheists in America ok with cannibalism through consent

[The Valkyrie]

I would be more concerned about where you get your intel.

Literally the most famous atheist on youtube (The Amazing Atheist) is a proponent of consensual cannibalism and wants to be eaten on his deathbed through this form of consent.

Now you have some intel

Well, the "Amazing atheist" is a loud, obnoxious, annoying idiot who doesn't represent this atheist in any way.

[Amarok]

Literally the most famous atheist on youtube (The Amazing Atheist) is a proponent of consensual cannibalism and wants to be eaten on his deathbed through this form of consent.

Now you have some intel

Well, the "Amazing atheist" is a loud, obnoxious, annoying idiot who doesn't represent this atheist in any way.

He's also a massive shock artist.Which is why i don't buy his serenity on the topic.

[Ravenshire]

I've thought about it, and it's the obvious presence of mental illness on one or both sides that presents a problem. You can't sign a legally-binding contract if you're nuts. You can't agree to be eaten because it means you're nuts, so we'd have no way of discerning whether the people involved were of sound mind. Also, it would usually constitute murder (it's murder even if the victim agrees to it, as the law stands), which is bad. It's a different story if the victim does the killing, but there's still the question of mental stability, which I think is insurmountable.

Hmmmm, it could be. But normally mental illness alone is not a justifiable reason to lock someone away. The normal standard is posing an immediate threat to themselves or others.

So a lot of it depends on the situation. But if it involves just eating a dead person who was going to die anyway, I'm for sure in favor of that. If my close friends and family want to eat me when I die, I'm fine with that.

The other ones are a little more tricky. But I think suicide and murder laws pretty much cover all of them. You can get them mental health treatment if they are an immediate threat to themselves or others.

I don't think the one doing the eating should have any consequences, unless murder or coersion were involved.

I guess I'm the atheist the troll was referencing.

Most jurisdictions, at least in the US, have laws forbidding the desecration of a corpse. I may be wildly off base, but I think butchering, cooking and consuming one would run afoul of those laws.

[zebo-the-fat]

When I'm dead you can do what you like with my corpse, I won't be using it, use the bits for organ donation (silly to feed the worms or the flames with them) whatever is left you can use to make a nice curry or feed it to the dogs. It's only meat after all!

[CapnAwesome]

Hmmmm, it could be. But normally mental illness alone is not a justifiable reason to lock someone away. The normal standard is posing an immediate threat to themselves or others.

So a lot of it depends on the situation. But if it involves just eating a dead person who was going to die anyway, I'm for sure in favor of that. If my close friends and family want to eat me when I die, I'm fine with that.

The other ones are a little more tricky. But I think suicide and murder laws pretty much cover all of them. You can get them mental health treatment if they are an immediate threat to themselves or others.

I don't think the one doing the eating should have any consequences, unless murder or coersion were involved.

I guess I'm the atheist the troll was referencing.

Most jurisdictions, at least in the US, have laws forbidding the desecration of a corpse. I may be wildly off base, but I think butchering, cooking and consuming one would run afoul of those laws.

That might be true, but I think if you have consent it should be something different. I mean I can donate my body to science I should be able to donate it to the hungry.

[Shell B]

Hmmmm, it could be. But normally mental illness alone is not a justifiable reason to lock someone away. The normal standard is posing an immediate threat to themselves or others.

Well, yes, but we're talking about contracts, not locking up.

So a lot of it depends on the situation. But if it involves just eating a dead person who was going to die anyway, I'm for sure in favor of that. If my close friends and family want to eat me when I die, I'm fine with that.

Yeah, I guess that's another situation. I think it's fucked up that they would want to eat you, but if you're dead anyway, the only argument against it is a slippery slope.

[Joods]

"Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup."

[Anomalocaris]

"Never meddle in the affairs of dragons,  for you are crunchy and good with ketchup."

Maybe dragons don’t like anything they can’t slurp?

[Joods]

"Never meddle in the affairs of dragons,  for you are crunchy and good with ketchup."

Maybe dragons don’t like anything they can’t slurp?

Maybe next time you get in an argument with a dragon, you should test the theory.

[Mister Agenda]

Like this is what i don't get with people who claims to be freethinkers and more morale than religious people. I don't care how subjective you think morality is, this crosses the line. I have seen online communities and youtube of american atheists who literally think eating someone's flesh is ok if they consent.

So human sacrifice too? Like what kind of insane logic is that.

It's usually very sensible to ask yourself 'if' before you ask others 'why'.