He 'said' he was a doctor, but I still have my doubts
Anyway, we all know that Serial-Murderers are the most frightening of murderers because those of us without much money (like, say, 98% of the U.S. population) are often the targets of their brutal assaults, midnight blood orgies and, of course, delicious cullinary masterpieces. If we were rich, like, say...the remaining 300,000 or so assholes who keep their immense riches only for themselves and therefore actually DESERVE to be eaten, then you're more likely to be kidnapped by Arab terrorists and beheaded because your family doesn't "negotiate" with terrorists (nor do they give 3-shits about you, jackass) than eaten. You see, serial-killers are the poor-man's Arab terrorists who hold you hostage for a ransom, which, like most things reserved for the poor, sucks WAAAY MORE than what rich people get.
I should have known Chicken McNuggets didn't come "Pre-Chewed"!!!
So we've covered Serial-Murderers...what about Cannibalistic Serial-Murderers? You might think that Jeffrey Dahmer is the most evil of serial-killers because he also ate his victims. No so. Although he did eat his victims, he is the most evil of serial-killers because he sexually abused and tortured young boys. Eating them was actually the most sane thing he did. I find it difficult to defend cannibalisitic serial-murderers, not because they are cannibalistic, but mostly the whole "murder" part. Assuming that all of Dahmer's victims had in fact died of natural causes, would we still consider him a monster because he just so happened to eat 15 people? Just think about it (if you dare). Why waste a perfectly good 150 or so pounds of meat just because it happens to be part of the human body? For more of an intellectual discussion on the morals of cannibalism, here's a clip from the 1993 movie "Alive".
Skip to about 8:00 for awesome cannibalistic action!
The reason cannibalistic serial-murderers are better than regular, non-cannibalistic serial-murderers has nothing to do with the "serial-murder" part of it but rather with the "cannibalistic" part of it. Here's a "Logical Argument" to help you understand:
1. If cannibalism is good and murder is bad then Jeffrey Dahmer is a good thing and a bad thing.
2. Cannibalism is good and murder is bad
3. Jeffrey Dahmer is a good thing and a bad thing
The assumption here, however, is that cannibalism is a "good thing." My job is not only to entertain you with sex jokes and cuss-words, but also to convince you of the positives of cannibalism. If, however, logical analysis is too complicated for you to understand (i.e. you're a dumbass), here's proof you can understand.
It is simply a matter of resources. The average dead body weighs roughly 150 lbs. That's bone, muscle and fat mostly, half of which are edible (mmm, bone marrow). Aside from the obvious benefits of eating the corpse (which were described in my previous article), there are also serveral uses for the inedible portions of the human body, very much like those of our animal counterparts. For instance, they can be used for music. Weaponary. Art. They are even "collected" and used for either scientific purposes or for weirding everyone the fuck out in your neighborhood. According to "the Bone Room," "...it is perfectly legal to posses and sell human bones in the United States." Science has infinite uses for human remains, from curing cancer to making your penis bigger. Either way, woudln't you rather your corpse be used to make a scientific breakthrough than to be eaten by worms, fungi and bacteria? I didn't think so...