Should we eat death row prisoners as meat

Con quoted-"Prisoners who are executed are abominations to society, but the family is not responsible for what they have done so they have a right to bury them. After a human being is executed, whether or not you like it, they were someone so they should be able to get a proper burial." Argument-I never said the family is responsible for those criminals, but who said that they should be buried and why it is important. It is just a ritual which is created by the society and men. FACT- Burial is very bad and has many demerits- 1- The embalming process is toxic. 2 -Many materials go into a process. 3- Memorial parks use a lot of space and resources. 4- Funeral are very expensive. http://www.techinsider.io... So you realize that it is better to eat them and not to bury them and they were just criminals who SHOULDN'T be given a proper burial( burial has many demerits). Con quoted -"If he is your father, and he claims his innocence and then he is eaten how would you feel then? He could be wrongly convicted"- Argument- You are talking about a situation which is 1 in 100 and GENERALLY actual culprits are only given death sentences, but exceptions exist everywhere, can't help. Con quoted- "Eating someone does not do anything, therefore there is absolutely no point in eating them." Argument- Why eating someone doesn't do anything. It is good because- 1- Many people will get a new dish, food and taste to eat, the same way we get by eating an animal. 2- Many people will get food. 3- Anyways men eats every living thing which is able to move so why not criminals. 4- It's better than burying them as I said above. Con quoted- "There is a huge difference between eating another humans flesh and eating an animals. Humans are humans, they walk, talk, and are somehow associated with our society. Animals on the other hand, are needed to provide the proper amount of protein" Argument- 1-Why there is a huge difference in eating a man and eating an animal. So what that men can walk, talk, and are associated to our society. Animals also walk, communicate, and are associated to their animal kingdom. 2-Just because you think that Man is the most superior of species. This is wrong. 3-Who gave you the right to eat animals. Just because some early evil men decided to do so and the society is carrying on the same tradition, It doesn't mean that something is right. 4-Just because we have our brains developed then animals, it doesn't give a right to us to eat them. Con quoted- "As they have proven, eating human flesh is addictive, but most people who go through withdraw from regular meat are going through it because they have a sudden lack of protein. That is the key difference: Human Flesh is totally unneeded l, whereas regular meat eaters go through a lack of protein withdraw" Argument- 1- There are crores of vegetarians in the world who are healthy and not have a lack of proteins. 2- If you think you have a lack of proteins then there are many vegetarian food which are very good in proteins and eating meat is certainly not the only option left. 3- Non vegetarians are on a sudden lack of proteins when they leave non veg food but that is because they were consuming non veg food in the first place. Why? 4- Non vegetarians only eat meat because they crave for its taste and are addicted to eat that and cover this fact by giving the reason of PROTEINS. 5- Veg food rich in proteins- Rice and Wheat, pulses, soy beans, corns, carrot, milk, egg, etc. Con quoted-"Let me ask you this, would you eat human flesh? Your answer is probably No , right? Chickens are not human beings. They can not think for themselves and probably aren't even aware that they exist. Just think about it, you can play the "why" game all you want, but pigs, cows, chickens, etc have been eaten since the dawn of time, but even way back when, cannibalism was still frowned upon. It isn't my fault that people are starving in Congo, how is that even relevant?" Argument- 1- Chickens are not humans, cannot think for themselves, and also don't know that they exist but that doesn't mean they are not contributing to the society. They are maintaining the ecological balance for you and me to survive. And anyways WHO gave you the right to eat other living being. source- https://www.reference.com... 2- Yes I agree that pigs, cows, chickens, etc have been eaten since the dawn of time but that doesn't make it a RIGHT practice and tradition. does it? ex- Prostitution has also been there since the dawn of time and mankind but then also today it has been banned in many parts of the world. 3- Cannibalism has been frowned upon since ages but that is again created by society and as I said in my previous debate argument, that you grow up believing in what the society teaches you, whether it is right or wrong. 4- It is definitely your fault and fault of every non vegetarian in this world that people around the world are dying because of lack of food. explanation- People demand non veg food, so these animals are deliberately bred and multiplied in huge numbers. Where these animals should have been 100 naturally, now they are 5000 in number. Now in order to feed them and make them healthy so people can consume them, they are given the veg food and water which would have otherwise been given to the humans, and hence people in poor countries are dying because of lack of food. Statistics say that vegetarian food for 20 people = non veg food for 2 people. So, definitely you all non vegetarians are responsible for hunger and deaths in poor countries like Somalia, Congo, etc, because you all are addicted to that taste. aren't you? Please refer these and you will understand my point and explanation completely- Con quoted-"Like I said earlier, there is a big difference between a wild animal and a executed prisoner. A heard of wild Buffalo will kill you in the wild, so by your logic they are useless to society. This is a moral question, we don't eat humans because they are humans, and in a way wouldn't that like be killing them twice? Humans are humans, wild animals are wild" Argument- 1- A heard of wild buffaloes will kill you in the wild because their mind is not as developed as humans but that doesn't mean you should kill and eat them for your food purposes. As I said they are doing their contribution to the environment. And any sane and logical man would not go into the wild without any protection, I believe con! But yes you can kill anyone to save yourself, may be an animal. No, it wouldn't be killing them twice as I said, BURYING them has many disadvantages so just eat them right? Con quoted- "Prisoners are still humans, wild animals are not. Wild animals will try to kill you in an instant, just like a prisoner would. You wouldn't eat a human, but you would eat meat so don't be a hypocrite" Argument- 1- I am just saying either you eat both prisoners and animals or don't eat any of them, that's it. I didn't get why you are calling me a hypocrite. I am pretty clear on my words. 2-And humans eat chicken, goat, cow, fish, camel, who are friendly and very good pets, These animals are not wild and would not kill you in an instant. 3-Humans around the world generally don't consume any wild animals but these innocent pets and animals are there favorite dishes, so you first get the FACTS. Con quoted-" We are the most superior species, we aren't living in the jungle anymore and are far more intelligent than other animals. Can most animals cook and clean or think for themselves? No. Argument- 1- Yes I agree with you, we are the most intelligent species and aren't living in the jungle anymore, but we are definitely NOT the most SUPERIOR because- a) Humans are doing everything (development in every field, growing, increasing their potentials, etc) only for themselves and not for anybody else. They are doing this to satisfy their greed and curiosity and not so that everybody can live at peace. Poor are still dying but other human doesn't give a damn. In animals, all are equal. b) Humans are criminals like murderer, fraud, rapist, robber, thugs, goons, etc., whereas no other specie is. c)Humans are the most GREEDY species on the planet.All other species just use what they need and leave the rest for others but we try to take everything for ourselves. d)Human communities are never at peace. There are wars, caste, discrimination, competition, etc which is not seen in animals and other species e)Human species is the only specie where- A single person is responsible for killing millions. This is not seen in animals. f) Humans living in cities pollute the environment the maximum and very badly because of which global warming is raising habitats are getting destroyed and even animals and tribals are being affected rigorously due to this. So definitely humans ARE NOT the most SUPERIOR species INTELLIGENT of all, YES. - NO ANIMAL is responsible for extincting other animals. It's only we humans. Con is not clear about the facts and framing wrong statements to win. - Eating animals and not eating humans is normal because society has taught us that and we are grown seeing this BUT that DOESN'T NOT make it right or the IDEAL thing. - According to con if every prisoner eater is a killer than - every non-vegetarian is also a killer,.(of animals) -I am just saying that- There is nothing wrong in eating death row prisoners as I have explained in all my points above. I conclude by - -Either you eat both- animals and humans or you don't eat anyone. http://www.bustle.com... http://www.peta.org... Con just has psychological reasons in his arguments but I have given solid ones. Voters, please think something new and don't focus on the tradition path.