MrVilliam

I appreciate the response. I'd heard that it's similar to pork, and I've heard of prion diseases like kuru being a problem (which might be a non-issue if lab-grown maybe?)

It makes sense for religions to have a problem with it, possibly all meat made this way and not just human as it's "unnatural" or whatever. I'm no expert on religions of the world, but I'm not aware of any explicit directive to not eat human meat, but it wouldn't surprise me either way really.

So I guess assuming it were safe to eat which was my assumption, only secular people would really consider it. But maybe a lot of religious people wouldn't bother with any of the lab grown meat in the first place, so it's possible that lab grown human meat would be tried by as many people as any of the other options.

Yeah, asking for real. We might see such a scenario come to pass in my lifetime. If there's no human suffering and nobody has to die for it to occur, is there anything other than "seems icky" that would stop most people from at least trying human meat at some point in their life? Would it be illegal, legal but restricted, or as legal as beef? If not illegal, would you try it, and if so, how?

Without hesitation. If the taste, consistency, nutrition, and price are all the same, then the only differences would be whether an animal was bred to suffer until slaughter and the likelihood of illness from consumption. I'm assuming that stuff like e coli would be nearly impossible through this. Plus less demand on farm meat means less chance of coronavirus mutations like the 2009 swine flu outbreak. And less of a need for the real estate, feed, and potable water to grow those animals. I must be missing something because I'm struggling to see a downside here.

I'm sure that, in the same way that there's still a market for objectively inferior exploitatively mined diamonds as a status symbol instead of lab created diamonds, there would still be a market for rEaL meat where "you can really taste the suffering" or whatever.

Now here's the more interesting question that actually has me on the fence: if "growing any kind of animal tissue" is what has been achieved, where would you stand on consuming lab-grown human meat? Is it immoral? Are there risks? Should such a thing be restricted in some way like alcohol or handguns? What would be the proper etiquette and presentation and everything if it became socially accepted? What wine would pair best with it? Or would it be more of a beer pairing? If this weren't socially acceptable, would no-suffering chimpanzee meat be okay?

If it only takes a small cell sample, would it be unethical to dig up extinct animals like mammoths or dodo specifically to enjoy their meat? If that's okay, and it chimps are okay, would neanderthals be okay to eat? Where would we draw the line?

I think you're already forgetting just how prevalent the story of the murder was. It wasn't just local news. It was unavoidable.

Luigi is innocent until proven guilty. I think it's weird that cops found a backpack in central park with no real evidence, but found a gun, a suppressor, and a written confession that started off with praising the cops on this guy who decided to get McDonalds in the middle of the day. I'm not saying that the cops planted evidence to have somebody to finger, but it seems convenient.

Trump Aid. TrAid for short. But change the spelling to avoid litigation from Kool-Aid. TrAde. And let's make that A lower case. Trade. Can I have a position in the administration now?

"Wake up sheeple, being woke is bad."

The conservative ideological superposition is so goddamn stupid.

Glad my wife and I aren't the only ones. It's frustrating to explain why proposed solutions won't work while already worked up over stressful bullshit. Sometimes there just aren't real solutions. Sometimes you just need to open a pressure relief valve for a minute so you can have a little reset and be better equipped to tackle the mountain of bullshit.

I'm a power plant operator who will be working day shift on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. The shout-out is appreciated. Even our own families often don't understand that this is just how it's gonna shake out most of the time. My in-laws get annoyed that we just won't be able to visit at the same time as everybody else, but they just don't really think about the power they're relying on for their holiday at home. They're weekday office workers, and they could probably do more than half of their work from home.

Thankfully my wife very much understands it and we schedule all holidays based on actual availability instead of expecting me to try to cram things in before or after my 12 hour shifts plus 1 hour commute each way on the day of. A lot of people in this industry wind up divorced, and I think the schedule is mostly what's to blame.

The paycheck will be great, but it's still nice to hear that appreciation for the time we and our families are sacrificing to provide for the rest of society. In this way, I sort of get to be one Santa Claus of many. We are making sure that Christmas comes to everybody.

You son of a bitch, I'm in

Idk about you, but at this rate, I don't dare try to tell them otherwise.

I appreciate the nuance and detail of your comment. I wanted to make sure I started with that so you don't think I'm just here to shit on your comment. I'm upset that we're here and slapping bandaids on this shit instead of actually thinking about solutions.

Congress can't pass a budget, but they can raise their own pay. They haven't passed any meaningful legislation in two years, but they can raise their own pay. They can't raise our minimum wage, but they can raise their own pay. Idk about you, but I've never gotten a raise for pisspoor performance at any job I've ever held. I'll be receiving a 3.5% raise in a couple weeks, and I've very much earned that, and it's thankfully a bit higher than the ~2.8% inflation over the past year so it's an actual raise. Not everybody has been so lucky. I'm completely on board with paying Congress well so that it's not gated off for only the wealthy elite to have access to, but let's not pretend that passing a raise for themselves right now is eradicating all semblance of corruption once and for all.

Why does Congress actually need to be in DC anymore anyway? Why not have an office in their district and securely remote vote? Having them in DC maintaining two residences is costing them more, keeping them physically distanced from their actual constituents, and making corporate lobbying significantly easier since they can easily talk face to face with dozens of reps/senators in a single afternoon. We could also raise the cap on the House since it's been undersized for proper representation for decades; no need to cap it to a number that can regularly gather in the chambers anymore. I'd rather they just stay in their district and lock their pay to their local inflation rate. If they want better raises, then they need to actually help their district.

No, this is the long term effect of voting for "eLeCtAbLe" politicians in primaries. Putting a centrist in the general to run against the right in hopes of pulling voters from the right DOES NOT FUCKING WORK. Can we please finally accept that and move on?