OT waaaay OT

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...ptian-mummies-
have-a-right-to-privacy.html

I have long wondered if there is a point at which a respected scientist
becomes a common grave robber.
Is it a matter of how old the grave is?
If the robber in question has a PhD can they ravage a younger grave than
someone with a Masters? Is it simply a matter of anybody working for an
educational institution or research foundation has the right to dig up
the dead wherever they find them?
If the civilization to which the deceased belonged is extinct does that
mean they no longer have rights? Does the family of the dead simply have
to be far enough removed that they cannot bring a suit at law?
Is the difference between research and theft somebody somewhere making a
profit from the contents of the grave? How would one define profit for
such purposes?
What exactly is the difference in law between somebody waltzing in and
digging up your mom, and somebody digging up your great-great-great-great-
great-(etc)grandmother?

NightMist


--
I'm raising a developmentally disabled child. What's your superpower?

I've always felt that way, NM. Well, maybe not always but since I was 4 or
5. On a Florida vacation we visited St. Augustine and I remember being
taken to an Indian burial ground. I remember thinking it was disgraceful
and irreverent and assorted other shocked thoughts. When we moved to the
Swamp, we were told that the area around the ancient sycamore tree was the
hamster cemetery. We are very respectful and let those furry creatures rest
in peace. Polly


"NightMist" wrote in message
...


http://www.newscientist.com/article/...ptian-mummies-
have-a-right-to-privacy.html

I have long wondered if there is a point at which a respected scientist
becomes a common grave robber.
Is it a matter of how old the grave is?
If the robber in question has a PhD can they ravage a younger grave than
someone with a Masters? Is it simply a matter of anybody working for an
educational institution or research foundation has the right to dig up
the dead wherever they find them?
If the civilization to which the deceased belonged is extinct does that
mean they no longer have rights? Does the family of the dead simply have
to be far enough removed that they cannot bring a suit at law?
Is the difference between research and theft somebody somewhere making a
profit from the contents of the grave? How would one define profit for
such purposes?
What exactly is the difference in law between somebody waltzing in and
digging up your mom, and somebody digging up your great-great-great-great-
great-(etc)grandmother?

NightMist


--
I'm raising a developmentally disabled child. What's your superpower?

I've also felt that way, especially when I read in the paper where an
ancient burial place has been uncovered and artifacts found, and put in a
museum. Here in the SC, GA, NC, TN corners area we have a Cherokee group
that checks on these things. No, I don't know how to get in touch with them
but I know they exist. My son used to make necklaces to sale and he was
visited by them and he showed them how he got his natural materials and they
were satisfied. Yes, Great grandmother was Cherokee, Eastern Tribe, and I
have pictures of her. In St Augustine I saw the graves at the Fountain of
Youth.
Barbara in SC

My opinion is always, "Depends on what they are looking at these
things FOR".

If they are looking at a place and 'find' remains, then it would be
appropriate to find out why the remains are there.

If there is a good forensic reason to exhume remains, then that is
also valid.

If the remains need to be moved, for any valid reason, then it should
be done with respect.

However. As I also subscribe to the belief that our bodies are just
overcoats we slough to free the soul, I can see no logical reason to
object to widening our Knowledge through exploration of the past. And
I think, by and large, I would be rather flattered by the attention if
I thought my remains would be of use long centuries after I had
finished with it.

Yes, I think I would rather be a lesson, than simply land-fill.

But, contrarily, there ARE limits. These are the Mores of the area.
And we have strict Laws governing those... usually.

A thoughtful subject...

Nel

It is an interesting topic, and there may be those of us with opinions
who will not say anything at all, here.

In the early years of this decade, a planned community was started not
too far from here. Much of it runs close by a local river that has
headwaters up in our mountains and wind downs throught the valley and
plains to the ocean. There was an Native American settlement and
burial site found at one point, which stopped things while they
decided what to do. I was apalled to find out later that they found
additional sites and simply bulldozed over/destroyed everything
without noticing to anyone.

On the other hand, the gun range up in the mountains, that my dad
helped build, is placed on forestry land. About 20 years ago they
found out that one of the areas they had developed was actually the
fringe of a ceremonial and burial ground for the local Native American
tribe. They stopped any other improvements, pulled everything for the
range out and set everything back, area is returned to its former
status. It cost them a lot of time and money to set things to right,
but it was the right and respectful thing to do. The whole area is
closed during ceremonial days and solstices in order to give the honor
due to live side-by-side with all types of people.

Ginger in CA

On Sep 11, 4:03*pm, NightMist wrote:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/...ptian-mummies-
have-a-right-to-privacy.html

I have long wondered if there is a point at which a respected scientist
becomes a common grave robber.
Is it a matter of how old the grave is? *
If the robber in question has a PhD can they ravage a younger grave than
someone with a Masters? *Is it simply a matter of anybody working for an
educational institution or research foundation has the right to dig up
the dead wherever they find them?
If the civilization to which the deceased belonged is extinct does that
mean they no longer have rights? Does the family of the dead simply have
to be far enough removed that they cannot bring a suit at law? *
Is the difference between research and theft somebody somewhere making a
profit from the contents of the grave? *How would one define profit for
such purposes?
What exactly is the difference in law between somebody waltzing in and
digging up your mom, and somebody digging up your great-great-great-great-
great-(etc)grandmother?

NightMist

--
I'm raising a developmentally disabled child. *What's your superpower?

I pretty much agree Nel.
Taria
"Sartorresartus" wrote in message
...
My opinion is always, "Depends on what they are looking at these
things FOR".

If they are looking at a place and 'find' remains, then it would be
appropriate to find out why the remains are there.

If there is a good forensic reason to exhume remains, then that is
also valid.

If the remains need to be moved, for any valid reason, then it should
be done with respect.

However. As I also subscribe to the belief that our bodies are just
overcoats we slough to free the soul, I can see no logical reason to
object to widening our Knowledge through exploration of the past. And
I think, by and large, I would be rather flattered by the attention if
I thought my remains would be of use long centuries after I had
finished with it.

Yes, I think I would rather be a lesson, than simply land-fill.

But, contrarily, there ARE limits. These are the Mores of the area.
And we have strict Laws governing those... usually.

A thoughtful subject...

Nel

On Sep 12, 10:41*am, Ginger in CA wrote:

It is an interesting topic, and there may be those of us with opinions
who will not say anything at all, here.

I will not state my own personal opinion on the subject. The
following observations/quotes are not my own, and do not reflect my
opinion, so please do not read anything into them. Like others'
posts, they are only extrapolated for further consideration of a very
complex issue.
----------
Spock: "Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the
needs of the few. "

To the question in general, is what Spock said true? Should it be?
It's the basis for concepts in law like "eminent domain", derived from
British Common Law.

"At the time the United States was created, it and the several states
continued to use the British common law, including the principle of
eminent domain."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain#Terminology

Nightmist queried:
If the civilization to which the deceased belonged is extinct does that
mean they no longer have rights?

What if the group to which the deceased belonged had no knowledge of
the site prior to discovery, and only spoke up when it learned there
was something to gain/make an issue of?

On Sep 12, 7:26 pm, Jack Campin - bogus address
wrote:

almost all the Native Americans who
weren't exterminated by the genocide are kept so far down at
the bottom of the social heap that they don't have a prayer of
getting a scientific education.
----------
While that was true at one time, it is no longer accurate.

To date, 17,000 Native Americans have been through the AISES program
and are working in fields related to science and engineering.
http://tinyurl.com/293zf69
Much more current information:
http://tinyurl.com/232rlw7