You might not have heard this, but the lawyer for Armin Meiwes, the German cannibal, is defending his client’s actions on the grounds of mutual consent–Meiwes wanted to eat somebody, Bernd Brandes wanted to be eaten, and who is the state to interfere with the actions of two consenting adults? Unfortunately, as the inimitable Theodore Dalrymple points out, he has a case. Can modern philosophy and jurisprudence really come up with any coherent reason to convict him?
