Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Burial for Killers


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Burial for Killers Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 10:03:01 AM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Absolutely. In barbaric times, barbaric peoples should be treated using barbaric measures.


Let me fix that for you: barbarians treat barbarians barbarically.

quote:

These, however, are no longer barbaric times. At least not in the US.


We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

quote:

I do accept that it is possible that there are countries that haven't evolved out of barbarism.


More importantly, there are people in every country that haven't. Hence, this thread.

quote:

Within the US, these are not barbaric times, so barbaric peoples should not be treated barbarically.


A good sentiment. A good goal.

Proper burial of the dead is the first sign of civilization; I think that's significant.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 10:31:15 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
And, once again, if a mortician doesn't want Tsaernaev buried in his/her cemetery and hasn't already taken money for a burial plot for him, then, there is zero responsibility for that mortician to bury him on the property. There simply isn't.

Since the cemetery that the Uncle wants the body buried in is city owned, not privately owned, it becomes a matter of government discrimination.

Does it? Is burial free? Is upkeep of the plots in the cemetery free? If there is a cost to be paid, then if no payment has been made, no plot is owed. Does the city charter or the city-owned cemetery program define who is and who is not eligible?
Fewer if's, but still enough.

Nowhere have I read that cost is the issue. The only thing I've read in the press is denial of access - which is a different thing.
Again, if you go to any cemetery in the country you will likely find criminals buried there. Where do people think the bodies of criminals from religious backgrounds that require burial go? They don't just evaporate away. The hardened criminal who serves his sentence and is released, gets old, dies - gets buried somewhere. I mean that is the reality. Do people honestly think that only law-abiding people are buried in cemeteries?? Do people honestly think that all criminals are buried at sea, or cremated?? I'm just confused about the premises that people are using.


Cost of maintaining the security of the cemetery and the burial plots for this kid and the ones around his. That's what I'm talking about with costs. But, all that being said, if the burial hasn't been paid for, no cemetery owes the kid anything. It may be further complicated that this is a public cemetery and if the kid had paid city taxes, theoretically, you could say he's already started paying for a burial.

Does a mortician have a right to bar a body from being buried in that cemetery based on the cost of upkeep of the facility, and some plots? I think a mortician has that right.

I disagree with anything abusing the body as a "revenge" action. I find that to be pointless. Cremation? Again, that's not up to me, but to the person or people who have guardianship rights over that body. Apparently, the uncle wants it buried. Fine. No cremation. If no mortician wants him buried in their cemetery, best of luck on that one.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 10:40:34 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Absolutely. In barbaric times, barbaric peoples should be treated using barbaric measures.

Let me fix that for you: barbarians treat barbarians barbarically.
quote:

These, however, are no longer barbaric times. At least not in the US.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.
quote:

I do accept that it is possible that there are countries that haven't evolved out of barbarism.

More importantly, there are people in every country that haven't. Hence, this thread.
quote:

Within the US, these are not barbaric times, so barbaric peoples should not be treated barbarically.

A good sentiment. A good goal.
Proper burial of the dead is the first sign of civilization; I think that's significant.
IWYW,
— Aswad.


We have differing definitions of "barbaric," Aswad. I am open to defining the bombers as being barbaric, or acting barbarically. But, we've come a long way since the barbaric days of yore. Many will claim that the way the American Indians were treated was barbaric, and there won't be all that much dickering over that. The American Indians also treated the colonists barbarically. Without even attempting to lay blame or anything like that for those times, I would say that those were barbaric days. We are past that, and have been for quite some time, actually.

And, we also may have a different opinion of what, exactly, a "proper burial" would be. No one is saying the kid can't be buried. Some are saying the kid can't be buried here, but that is certainly different. It very well may be a property rights issue.




_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 10:55:19 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline 		Again, funeral directors and morticians are typically not owners or even managers of cemeteries. Please stop implying they are.

By what I am reading here, then it would be wrong to ship the body back to his home country if that is what the family wanted to do. After all, they theoretically could decide that they wanted him buried in his homeland, where his grave could become a symbol for martyrdom.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 11:22:45 AM   
OsideGirl


Posts: 14441
Joined: 7/1/2005
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
And, once again, if a mortician doesn't want Tsaernaev buried in his/her cemetery and hasn't already taken money for a burial plot for him, then, there is zero responsibility for that mortician to bury him on the property. There simply isn't.


Since the cemetery that the Uncle wants the body buried in is city owned, not privately owned, it becomes a matter of government discrimination.


Not sure about that. The body is no longer a person and has no constituional rights. Not sure the uncle has much standing in that constitutional question either. But maybe. Interesting point.


It's not about the body. Buying a burial plot is buying a piece of land. The Uncle would actually be the purchaser and owner. Refusing to sell the plot to Uncle could possibly end up in a law suit for the city. Even if the city wins, and it's not considered discrimination, it would still be an expensive headache.

_____________________________

Give a girl the right shoes and she will conquer the world. ~ Marilyn Monroe

The Accelerated Velocity of Terminological Inexactitude

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 11:54:30 AM   
fucktoyprincess


Posts: 2337
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Again, funeral directors and morticians are typically not owners or even managers of cemeteries. Please stop implying they are.

By what I am reading here, then it would be wrong to ship the body back to his home country if that is what the family wanted to do. After all, they theoretically could decide that they wanted him buried in his homeland, where his grave could become a symbol for martyrdom.


While the family might want that - we also don't have to do it. He committed a criminal and terrorist act that resulted in 3 people's deaths according to the statements that his brother gave in the hospital. We are NOT required under International law to release his body to his family who are outside the U.S. No one anywhere in the world would argue that we are compelled to send him to his mother. So NO - the Jihadists do NOT get to make a martyr out him in Dagestan. They do not have that right (unless we are stupid enough to insist on sending the body to Dagestan). Again, why are we enabling the terrorists? A quick and quiet burial here in the U.S. with an unmarked grave, and let's get on to more important things.

< Message edited by fucktoyprincess -- 5/8/2013 11:56:01 AM >

_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 12:14:12 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
And, once again, if a mortician doesn't want Tsaernaev buried in his/her cemetery and hasn't already taken money for a burial plot for him, then, there is zero responsibility for that mortician to bury him on the property. There simply isn't.


Since the cemetery that the Uncle wants the body buried in is city owned, not privately owned, it becomes a matter of government discrimination.


Not sure about that. The body is no longer a person and has no constituional rights. Not sure the uncle has much standing in that constitutional question either. But maybe. Interesting point.


It's not about the body. Buying a burial plot is buying a piece of land. The Uncle would actually be the purchaser and owner. Refusing to sell the plot to Uncle could possibly end up in a law suit for the city. Even if the city wins, and it's not considered discrimination, it would still be an expensive headache.

OG, as I understand discrimination the complaint would fall under the Civil Rights Act which identifies discrimination by class . . . and terrorists are not so named as a class in the Act. Otherwise, I don't think the Uncle would have any standing. But hey, I am not a SC Asscociate Judge. I only play one on CM

(in reply to OsideGirl)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 12:58:12 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
Again, funeral directors and morticians are typically not owners or even managers of cemeteries. Please stop implying they are.
By what I am reading here, then it would be wrong to ship the body back to his home country if that is what the family wanted to do. After all, they theoretically could decide that they wanted him buried in his homeland, where his grave could become a symbol for martyrdom.


I haven't mentioned Funeral Directors. I admit that I did think morticians owned the cemeteries (while Funeral Directors own the Funeral Homes). If I'm wrong, any time I refer to a mortician as the owner of a cemetery, feel free to consider my referral to be to the owner of a cemetery.

I have absolutely no problem if the family wants him shipped back to his homeland. None at all. I actually have no problem with his being buried in the States, either. For me, I don't care where he's buried. I am presenting the side that says that the owner of a cemetery (I do eventually learn.. lol) has a right to bar someone from being buried in his/her cemetery unless the service has already been paid for.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 1:00:21 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
Again, funeral directors and morticians are typically not owners or even managers of cemeteries. Please stop implying they are.
By what I am reading here, then it would be wrong to ship the body back to his home country if that is what the family wanted to do. After all, they theoretically could decide that they wanted him buried in his homeland, where his grave could become a symbol for martyrdom.

While the family might want that - we also don't have to do it. He committed a criminal and terrorist act that resulted in 3 people's deaths according to the statements that his brother gave in the hospital. We are NOT required under International law to release his body to his family who are outside the U.S. No one anywhere in the world would argue that we are compelled to send him to his mother. So NO - the Jihadists do NOT get to make a martyr out him in Dagestan. They do not have that right (unless we are stupid enough to insist on sending the body to Dagestan). Again, why are we enabling the terrorists? A quick and quiet burial here in the U.S. with an unmarked grave, and let's get on to more important things.


Are we also going to prevent a monument from being erected in Chechnya as a symbol for martyrdom?


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 1:23:04 PM   
FunCouple5280


Posts: 559
Joined: 10/30/2012
Status: offline 		Nope

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 1:23:50 PM   
fucktoyprincess


Posts: 2337
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
Again, funeral directors and morticians are typically not owners or even managers of cemeteries. Please stop implying they are.
By what I am reading here, then it would be wrong to ship the body back to his home country if that is what the family wanted to do. After all, they theoretically could decide that they wanted him buried in his homeland, where his grave could become a symbol for martyrdom.

While the family might want that - we also don't have to do it. He committed a criminal and terrorist act that resulted in 3 people's deaths according to the statements that his brother gave in the hospital. We are NOT required under International law to release his body to his family who are outside the U.S. No one anywhere in the world would argue that we are compelled to send him to his mother. So NO - the Jihadists do NOT get to make a martyr out him in Dagestan. They do not have that right (unless we are stupid enough to insist on sending the body to Dagestan). Again, why are we enabling the terrorists? A quick and quiet burial here in the U.S. with an unmarked grave, and let's get on to more important things.


Are we also going to prevent a monument from being erected in Chechnya as a symbol for martyrdom?



For cultures and religions that follow burial it is undeniable that gravesites or memorials erected with actual human remains seem to hold greater hold and fascination over people. Not sure why exactly, but it is true.

In addition, I could care less what they choose to do in Dagestan on their own. I'm just saying we don't need to enable anything.

_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 1:24:35 PM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

While the family might want that - we also don't have to do it. He committed a criminal and terrorist act that resulted in 3 people's deaths according to the statements that his brother gave in the hospital. We are NOT required under International law to release his body to his family who are outside the U.S. No one anywhere in the world would argue that we are compelled to send him to his mother. So NO - the Jihadists do NOT get to make a martyr out him in Dagestan. They do not have that right (unless we are stupid enough to insist on sending the body to Dagestan). Again, why are we enabling the terrorists? A quick and quiet burial here in the U.S. with an unmarked grave, and let's get on to more important things.

As I understand it, the Uncle has claimed the body and now the actual decision on where the body might be buried is up to him, not the US govt or Americans.. so imo, if the family wanted him to, the uncle could ship the body back to Russia on his own dime.. I expect that he might need to do some paperwork but I seriously doubt anyone could stop him from doing that.. just as I doubt anyone can force him to ship the body back there (even if some of us would prefer that)..

If I am wrong about that, I am sure someone will inform me of that and provide various links, etc proving that..

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 1:44:05 PM   
fucktoyprincess


Posts: 2337
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444


quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

While the family might want that - we also don't have to do it. He committed a criminal and terrorist act that resulted in 3 people's deaths according to the statements that his brother gave in the hospital. We are NOT required under International law to release his body to his family who are outside the U.S. No one anywhere in the world would argue that we are compelled to send him to his mother. So NO - the Jihadists do NOT get to make a martyr out him in Dagestan. They do not have that right (unless we are stupid enough to insist on sending the body to Dagestan). Again, why are we enabling the terrorists? A quick and quiet burial here in the U.S. with an unmarked grave, and let's get on to more important things.

As I understand it, the Uncle has claimed the body and now the actual decision on where the body might be buried is up to him, not the US govt or Americans.. so imo, if the family wanted him to, the uncle could ship the body back to Russia on his own dime.. I expect that he might need to do some paperwork but I seriously doubt anyone could stop him from doing that.. just as I doubt anyone can force him to ship the body back there (even if some of us would prefer that)..

If I am wrong about that, I am sure someone will inform me of that and provide various links, etc proving that..


The decision on burial within the U.S. might be up to the uncle, but as this is the body of a known criminal/terrorist, yes, the U.S. government does in fact have a say about whether the body can be sent out of the country. International law does not require us to release the body outside of the U.S.

Even sending the body to another state within the U.S. for burial requires state authorization.

Not surprisingly, people are not allowed to just ship dead bodies around wherever and however they want. Part of the issue is obviously the health hazard, but there are other reasons, too. This is a regulated activity.

_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to tj444)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 2:22:49 PM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
The decision on burial within the U.S. might be up to the uncle, but as this is the body of a known criminal/terrorist, yes, the U.S. government does in fact have a say about whether the body can be sent out of the country. International law does not require us to release the body outside of the U.S.

Even sending the body to another state within the U.S. for burial requires state authorization.

Not surprisingly, people are not allowed to just ship dead bodies around wherever and however they want. Part of the issue is obviously the health hazard, but there are other reasons, too. This is a regulated activity.

remind me not to die here..

I do expect there would be paperwork involved (maybe a lot), but if the US govt does have the authority to refuse to let the body be shipped back, what reason would they give for that? So far I have not heard any objection to doing that, if the uncle requested it.. he did not die of any weird disease so how could he be a health hazard? If his religion allowed cremation, would his ashes also face the same problem? I expect there are some people that die in the US (tourists, immigrants, etc) and their families want them sent out of the country.. Apart from them dying of some weird disease, I cant see any reason for that to be refused..

eta- when i was young my uncle (who lived in Canada) & was a geoligist died in Alaska in a helicopter crash, he was sent back to Canada and I dont recall any problems with that being arranged & in a timely manner..

< Message edited by tj444 -- 5/8/2013 2:31:24 PM >

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 2:40:28 PM   
fucktoyprincess


Posts: 2337
Status: offline 		Some of us have mentioned this already in earlier posts, but sending the body back to Dagestan does increase both a media and martyrdom risk that seems unnecessary for the U.S. to take. Please read my OP. This isn't a random person who just happened to die in the U.S. If YOU died here, the considerations would have been very different. You would have been shipped home to your family a long time ago to allow your family to give you appropriate funeral rites according to your own religion, and surrounded by your family and friends in what was your home. I don't see how any of that applies to a criminal. We need not be concerned about sending him home to his mother. Again, a quick, quiet burial in an unmarked grave in the U.S. seems to satisfy humanitarian concerns without having to create a martyr out of him. It is, btw, Americans who are calling for his body to be sent to Dagestan (in a move that seems against self-interest to me). Again, this discussion is in the thread.

< Message edited by fucktoyprincess -- 5/8/2013 2:42:55 PM >

_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to tj444)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 2:45:46 PM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline 		as DS pointed out, he can be made into a martyr in other ways regardless of if his body is returned to Russia or not.. refusing to send his body back (if that is what they really wanted) could actually make him more of a martyr & make the US look like the bad guy, imo..

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 2:57:35 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline 		~FR~

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx-VAqKDDuc

(in reply to tj444)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 3:02:22 PM   
fucktoyprincess


Posts: 2337
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

as DS pointed out, he can be made into a martyr in other ways regardless of if his body is returned to Russia or not.. refusing to send his body back (if that is what they really wanted) could actually make him more of a martyr & make the US look like the bad guy, imo..


We are allowed to deal with criminals as we see fit. We don't owe his mother or people in Dagestan anything.

What we do owe this criminal is a quick burial (as any other criminal in our country is allowed).

I think a monument to a martyr without a body, or without being the site of the martyrdom, is interesting, but not that compelling to a lot of people.

My two cents. If you feel Canada should be sending criminals back to where they came from, be my guest. I don't feel we owe anyone that.



_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to tj444)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 3:26:08 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Meh. 

In the name of the father and the son,
in the hole you go.

Dump the rotting corpse in the ground somewhere; anywhere.  Done. We don't (or shouldn't) really care. Fuckin thing is dead.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Burial for Killers - 5/8/2013 3:52:37 PM   
LizDeluxe


Posts: 687
Joined: 10/2/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Again, funeral directors and morticians are typically not owners or even managers of cemeteries. Please stop implying they are.

By what I am reading here, then it would be wrong to ship the body back to his home country if that is what the family wanted to do. After all, they theoretically could decide that they wanted him buried in his homeland, where his grave could become a symbol for martyrdom.


Why is this the decision of anyone but his next of kin? I'm not up to speed on the law as it relates to the remains of suspects (he was never convicted of anything) but doesn't the deceased become the property of the next of kin upon their death? If the family wants to bury him in his homeland is that not their right as long as they pay the tab? Bury the guy in an unmarked grave somewhere and be done with it. All this activity surrounding his burial (or lack of it) just extends his fifteen minutes of fame.

_____________________________

While is there no liberal talk radio? There are at least five conservative talk radio shows available over the air every day in the radio market I live in. Why does the liberal message fail to attract listeners?

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Burial for Killers Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109