The world has gone to hell and food is extremely rare. To survive would you rather (if you had to choose one).......

On the day that food is scarce and the world is back to a primitive state, I would probably hunt. I can't imagine it now, but in circumstances where I would actually fit into the ecosystem, I would likely do it.

If I was starving I would look for plants, obviously, but if I couldn't find any?

I would look for carrion. I would refrain from killing.

Yes, I know the point of the question. But, I would kill neither.

In Mahayana Buddhism, those who take certain vows aren't even allow to eat carrion. So we'll see.

Kill the human and take their food. Plus a WHOLE basement of food? That will last me like a year! I won't have to go kill a bunch of animals either. I'll just have to stand by the basement door with a shotgun to stop the others who said they would steal the food. lol

but I agree where is the kill and eat a human option! I rather kill a human HOWEVER i often bring this up with people...look at how fat and disgusting most people are. I don't think i could eat someone that has been living on fast food diets and toxic meat. If you eat them you are going to absorb all that nasty shit. Plus so many have cancer and such. Forget it! I'll take the deer. Humane death plus a prayer. I won't enjoy it but hey, i will survive.

what kind of animal? if I had to chose I would prefer to have the animal kill the human. This way the animal is fed and I get to eat the food stored by the human... and I don't really have to get my hands dirty lol

As a good anti-speciesist I don't respect humans for what species they belong to but for the way they behave.
I would rather kill the one that had the easy choice not to eat meat, knew about the suffering but still ate it.
Non human animals don't have a choice to eat or not other animals.

As a good anti-speciesist abolishinist I have to refrain from the poll but say that human and non-human animals both accord the same degree of respect. Whichever of the two would suffer most if left alive is the best candidate for premature death. Example: A soccer mom would likely have a more difficult time in the wilderness than an opossum- eat the soccer mom if you are clinically starving to death. Really. (imagine emoticon here)

(I can't take the poll cause the option of negotiating with the humans is going to be a reality "leave or I will kill you")

You wouldn't have to kill them per say. I would drug them with roofies LOL!

--RuNnInG WiT SciSSoRs--

The Following message may not contain information related to the specific subject matter. Readers discretion is advised.

I hate these questions that force you to choose between two unlikely options when in reality there will be many other possibilities...such as eating weeds and flowers or possibly scavenging for carcasses...to name a few...

where is "kill and eat a human"?
If killing the human is an option, why waste their meat?

use less everything!

this is why i love movies like 28 days later...i think that's the name of it. and hopefully i won't ever have to make this choice. which is why it's impossible for me to make hypothetically. i don't know until i am in that situation.