The Instigator
Bearman
Pro (for)
Winning
39 Points
The Contender
08tsuchiyar
Con (against)
Losing
30 Points

Dead people should be harvested for food.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/23/2007 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,351 times Debate No: 917
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (23)

 

Bearman

Pro

Dead people should be harvested for food. I say this because unreal amounts of money go into burying the dead in expensive boxes. That money could be spent on people who can't eat, and the bodies of the people being buried could also be used for food to feed the hungry and starving. I am not suggesting that people be harvested as our main source of food and diet, but, if we were able to make the dead weight (pun intended) of the new corpses into food, we could help to destroy the numbers of hungry people, and turn them into unhungry people.
08tsuchiyar

Con

There are two problems moraly and scientifically with eating human beings.

Human meat is one of the most poisonous meats to eat and is extremely unhealthy and only a small portion of the body can be eaten. Trained people need to "harvest" the meat.

Secondly I am sure the religious/moral views of many would be offended and very few bodies would be allowed to be harvested.
Debate Round No. 1
Bearman

Pro

Although the religious and moral oppositions would exist they could easily be overcome. People eventually get used to thinks, its called being desensitized. So if the government made it mandatory, people would get used to the idea of eating people because people are generally to timid and cowardly to attempt to overthrow the government on the means of what we have to eat.

You also said that people would have to be trained to harvest the meat, well, you're right, but, that would help the economy and help starving people, instead of just helping the economy.

You also said that only a small portion of the body can be eaten. Well that small portion could still feed someone who direly needs food, now couldn't it.
08tsuchiyar

Con

Economically it is not very beneficial as any money used for the "harvesting" of the meat can be more efficiently used for starving people through rather transporting food other wise wasted (not wasting but wasted) like when there is an overproduction to feed the people would be more useful. Also enforcing such a thing would be VERY expensive as there would be a huge resistance.

Although people may get used to it religious and moral objections generally should not be ignored. Especially if a large portion of the population would object.

P.S. this is fun!!!
Debate Round No. 2
Bearman

Pro

Well, I am going to start off by addressing your P.S. and yes it is i don't actually support cannibalism.

But, for the sake of the debate, ignore that, please.

You said that religious and moral objections shouldn't be ignored, although, idealistically religious objections should be ignored because that shows a favor to a specific religion, which is strictly frowned upon. Morals are also changed by society and the way society acts, so, moral objections could be easily changed with PSA's and other smalls forms of propaganda. The possibility of corpse consumption is more likely than you think.
08tsuchiyar

Con

I see this as an entertaining and original idea and nothing more. The economic affects of such a proposal would be negative. THe spending would outway the benefits. Although the legalization of human meat consumption should happen for extreme circumstances although I doubt that the situation would be common.

But for the sake of harvesting it would be impractical and expensive and not very appleasing.
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by freckles14 9 years ago
freckles14
hey, i lied again! i feel dumb. sorry.*bashes head repeatedly into keyboard*
Posted by freckles14 9 years ago
freckles14
oh, i lied. i just read the topic, and it sounded like the poor would be eating dead people. Sorry :)
Posted by freckles14 9 years ago
freckles14
yummy. people. mmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....
Posted by 08tsuchiyar 9 years ago
08tsuchiyar
I was being an (Insert profanity of your choice)....I didn't realize how busy I was going to be.....I'll try and parcticipate in the next ones.

I apologize. It was selfish of me and I can understand your anger.
Posted by DocORock 9 years ago
DocORock
Hey, 08: You suck. You're taking on (challenging) multiple debates and only participating in a few. You suck. Stay out of the game if you can't handle it.
Posted by Araj 9 years ago
Araj
You do realize that you can get very ill from eating human flesh?

Although I would like to try people at least once in my life...
Posted by AK-47debater 9 years ago
AK-47debater
kinda morbid don't ya think
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
This is either a joke (likely ) or you are insane
Posted by 08tsuchiyar 9 years ago
08tsuchiyar
I refuse to vote in for myself in this one because you played the devils advocate. But I do find it hard to vote for you....so I just abstained. lol
Posted by darkenedcorridor 9 years ago
darkenedcorridor
You say that the majority of religions don't support it, I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. I think the answer is more that the majority of pastors/priests/ect. wouldn't support it. You could claim that for most of religions the real part of the human is the soul, which leaves the body on death, and so dead humans are just regular meat not special meat. Moreover the government wouldn't have to make it mandatory, just make it legal and support it. And society would transition on it's own; the first generation would hate it and stay away, the second would see less reason to stay away but still see it as "icky", the third and on would get gradually more desensitized as a whole. And those desensitized ones would help make that impact that Bearman is talking about.
23 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by philadam 9 years ago
philadam
Bearman08tsuchiyarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by freckles14 9 years ago
freckles14
Bearman08tsuchiyarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by BabySnakes 9 years ago
BabySnakes
Bearman08tsuchiyarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by hark 9 years ago
hark
Bearman08tsuchiyarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by jackpool 9 years ago
jackpool
Bearman08tsuchiyarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by DocORock 9 years ago
DocORock
Bearman08tsuchiyarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Rousseau 9 years ago
Rousseau
Bearman08tsuchiyarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by BahiraMalika 9 years ago
BahiraMalika
Bearman08tsuchiyarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by zibeltor 9 years ago
zibeltor
Bearman08tsuchiyarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by jwebb893 9 years ago
jwebb893
Bearman08tsuchiyarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03