If you had the ability to grow meat, why wouldn't you just grow beef or whatever animal meat you want?
What other benefit is there to growing human flesh in the quantity that would be needed for food? You wouldn't need that much for medical reasons. It would have to be tailored to the person anyway for medical purposes which would also seem to me to indicate animal flesh could be grown also since the ability to adjust the genetics would have to be there.
Why would this question come up? I suspect this is just someone trying to poke holes in yet another societal standard of behavior.
Yes, we must break “taboos” or we are not free!
![rolleyes ;/](http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
or this
The unique, equal, and inherent dignity of every human life is a core belief of Judeo-Christian moral philosophy and a foundation principle of Western civilization. Indeed, every historical evil committed in the West — slavery, eugenics, Jim Crow, the Holocaust, the Inquisition, you name it — flowed directly from rejecting or disregarding that principle.
Seen in this light, Dawkins’s cannibalistic yearning — there is no reason to eat human meat except as a means of sticking a finger in the Judeo-Christian eye — is both decadent and subversive.