Replies

While I quite agree that one's food should only disagree with him after the meal and not before, this comes from a moral judgment that human life is precious. Therefore, the law can stop consenting adults who had no history of mental illness, i.e. they can distinguish reality from fantasy, event though they are not infringing on other's rights.

I believe the fact that we don;t see more incidents like this, even though there appears to be quite a subculture on the net from the news reports about this case, is attributable to the effectiveness of legislating morals. Folks might want to eat each other but realize they'll get sent to a place where their potential meals are certainly not free range.

190 posted on 07/24/2004 9:34:55 PM PDT by asmith92008 (If we buy into the nonsense that we always have to vote for RINOs, we'll just end up taking the horn)

Thanks for typing these comments - I've had a good laugh already and it's Monday AM...

"While I quite agree that one's food should only disagree with him after the meal and not before, "

LMFAO!

"where their potential meals are certainly not free range."

Brilliant!

I also think that the subculture you refer to has a bunch of phony pretender types who, if they had the chance, wouldn't go thru with the deed.