PDA

View Full Version : Post-mortem molestation

yxboom
February 19th 2003, 02:38 AM
Police arrest pair after finding girl's corpse sexually abused
The Associated Press
(http://www.sacbee.com/state_wire/story/6114606p-7070336c.html)
"What has been described constitutes the grossest violation of trust and decency imaginable," Coroner Brian McCormick said in a written statement Friday. "Our hearts go out to the family and we share their anger."
Xmansmommy
February 19th 2003, 02:43 AM
That's just sick! :rant:
yxboom
February 19th 2003, 02:45 AM
It happened in CA :no:
GrayPilgrim
February 19th 2003, 11:01 AM
:rant:
Em7add11
February 20th 2003, 07:08 PM
That is truly appalling.
Pilgrim
February 20th 2003, 07:34 PM
And yet, why would people who think abortion is ok because the child is not yet a child and not yet alive, have any moral problem with what happens to a corpse that is obviously no longer a viable person?
Em7add11
February 20th 2003, 07:46 PM
Yeah, you'd think mutilating a baby and molesting the dead would fall into roughly the same tier of disgust.
Dr.GH
April 7th 2003, 04:50 PM
There is an interesting experience that students have when they are first introduced to human anatomy: they find that they are afraid. They are afraid of the cadaver.

Of course, they are really arfaid of what the cadaver represents, and (oddly) they are afraid to "hurt" the cadaver.

One tries to take advantage of that moment to point out that the cadaver can not feel anything, nad that if the student will, in the future, treat their patients with the same care they are using on the unfeeling carcass, they will be much better physitians.
The Laughing Man
April 7th 2003, 04:58 PM
I'd like to hear how anti-life supporters (hey, if they can use "anti-choice"...) who argue about personhood, having functional brains and higher brain functions can rationalize outrage at this.
lordsnooty
April 7th 2003, 05:15 PM
02-20-2003 @ 11:34 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=21067#post21067)
Pilgrim:

And yet, why would people who think abortion is ok because the child is not yet a child and not yet alive, have any moral problem with what happens to a corpse that is obviously no longer a viable person?

Hmm, I should have known that someone would bring about pro-choice comparisons :cry:

This is sick on so many levels. First of all, it is the body of a person (a fetus is not a person), secondly it was the body of a child (and so paedophilia must be involved), and thirdly it's wrong when we consider the effects on the poor parents of that child.

Paul
lordsnooty
April 7th 2003, 05:23 PM
Today @ 09:58 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=58252#post58252)
Jinx72:
I'd like to hear how anti-life supporters (hey, if they can use "anti-choice"...) who argue about personhood, having functional brains and higher brain functions can rationalize outrage at this.

This is a totally different issue. Those arguments that apply to abortion do not necessarily apply to corpse molestation.

This is wrong because of the effects on the parents, and the disrespect shown to the body of a young girl. Not to mention the paedophilia.

The comparison being made here is offensive and unwarranted. For shame.

Paul
Mr Stick71
April 7th 2003, 06:15 PM
Lordsnoody, show me the difference between a "fetus" at 9 months and that girl's body. Explain to me what's so fundementally different about them.
lordsnooty
April 7th 2003, 07:09 PM
Yesterday @ 11:15 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=58310#post58310)
Mr Stick71:

Lordsnoody, show me the difference between a "fetus" at 9 months and that girl's body. Explain to me what's so fundementally different about them.

Of course, this 'nine months' nonsense is redundant. Nobody argues for abortions at nine months.

If we assume an early fetus however - The body once contained the personality of a living person. To molest that body is to insult the memory of that person and to cause irreperable damage to the girl's grieving parents.

An early fetus is just a blob. It's not a person.

The difference should be obvious.

Paul
Pilgrim
April 8th 2003, 11:10 AM
And to molest the body of the unborn is to insult the potential of the child and the potential of all the children and the spark of life that is already within that fetus. With the fetus the spark of life is already kindled and burning, with the corpse the spark is long gone.

There really is little difference. The main argument is that the fetus is not a person, a corpse is not a person either.