Support NeoGAF

[mrseaves]

Maybe this will happen in a future where false equivalencies are valid arguments.




I chose that link because it was more succinct. It still got the point across even though it didn't delve so much into the minutiae of it all.

Secondly, the law allows for 'alternative methods' of disposal of bodies. This falls under this jurisdiction and there is no law prohibiting this method. So, the onus should fall upon the lawmakers to BAN this procedure specifically if there is no outward apparent risk to public health.



http://www.dispatch.com/live/conten.../23/state-halts-liquid-cremation.html?sid=101

It wasn't an argument, just a joke.

 

[Squirrel Killer]

On the burial permit, it gives you three choices: Burial, Cremated and Other. This is just another variation of cremation and by all accounts, a better variation of that process.

From your link:

House said the "other" option on applications applies to entombment, burial at sea, burial outside of Ohio and medical-research donation.

And apparently liquefying, according to the state department of health, is not cremation.

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

I would drink a body straight up.
And I'm leaving instructions for my family:
When I die, turn me into a jello shot.

 

[Devolution]

I can't wait till cannibal restaurants serving voluntary human meals are legalized.

I doubt this will ever happen because of health issues. Plus the comparison is silly. If these liquified corpses don't pose a threat to us who cares.

 

[daw840]

I am all for this. Who gives a shit what happens to me once I am dead.

WALTER!

 

[ToxicAdam]

From your link:

And apparently liquefying, according to the state department of health, is not cremation.

Why are you so combative with the constant snide remarks in the headers? I'm just having a discussion here. You act as if government officials are infallible or never wrong.

Those instances you list are just examples of what has previously qualified as 'other'. 'Burial at sea' is just another form of burial. This method is just another form of cremation. Oh, by the way, many places that accept donor cadavers use this very process to dispose of them.

It's a chemical process used to reduce a corpse to basic compounds. How is that reality different than what happens during conventional cremation?

 

[Zeke]

Sounds pretty cool I'd love to get a behind the scenes look at the process. I don't have anything against it as long its safe and there are no negative effects on the living go for it.

 

[Squirrel Killer]

Why are you so combative with the constant snide remarks in the headers? I'm just having a discussion here. You act as if government officials are infallible or never wrong.

As am I. But you seem to be making a big deal out this when all it is is just a case of a procedure that hasn't been approved yet. It is a proven process that is cleaner than other processes, apparently some people want it, and it's being considered in other states as well. The regulatory gears just turn slowly. Be patient.

Those instances you list are just examples of what has previously qualified as 'other'. 'Burial at sea' is just another form of burial. This method is just another form of cremation. Oh, by the way, many places that accept donor cadavers use this very process to dispose of them.

The government officials don't appear to think that the Other option is the catch all you appear to think it is. Since they made the rules and enforce the regulations, I'd guess that their interpretation of the regulations control in this situation.

It's a chemical process used to reduce a corpse to basic compounds. How is that reality different than what happens during conventional cremation?

Well if the outcome is the same, what's the difference between flying, driving, and walking? You still get there in the end.

 

[Carlisle]

Nickelodeon Slime.

And now I need a towel to clean up all the water I spit out on my monitor.

 

[Slavik81]

This is disgusting and makes me never want to drink water ever ever again.

Cremation was viewed as similarly distasteful. It took a while before the practicality won people over.

 

[Zeke]

Cremation was viewed as similarly distasteful. It took a while before the practicality won people over.

actually it wasn't until the last pope said it was cool to do that you saw a rise in cremation

 

[Josh7289]

Yeah don't want that in my water yo

 

[kehs]

I doubt this will ever happen because of health issues.

I think you mean because the sensoric orgasm people would have would destroy the current food industry.

 

[Shanadeus]

As am I. But you seem to be making a big deal out this when all it is is just a case of a procedure that hasn't been approved yet. It is a proven process that is cleaner than other processes, apparently some people want it, and it's being considered in other states as well. The regulatory gears just turn slowly. Be patient.

And those regulatory gears probably wouldn't turn at all if no one make a fuzz about this and point out how stupid it is to stop this process when it sounds better than the alternatives.

What's the point in pointing out that the regulation disallows it and just leave it at that?

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ce0UEb05DXI

 

[CornBurrito]

down the sewer? how disrespectful

Ignoring the wishes of the dead? That seems far more disrespectful.

I for one want my body thrown to the wolves after I die.

 

[Arrowgigantic]

The sun is going down, you know.

 

[Jenga]

Ignoring the wishes of the dead? That seems far more disrespectful.

I for one want my body thrown to the wolves after I die.

can I fool around with it a little

 

[kehs]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ce0UEb05DXI

And here I thought they were dumping bodies into a tub, dumping the chemicals in Breaking Bad style, and then just pulling the water plug after the process was over.

 

[CornBurrito]

can I fool around with it a little

Send pictures of yourself and I'll see.

 

[Jenga]

Send pictures of yourself and I'll see.

why?

you'll be dead

you won't care who fucks you when your dead

and you will get the pounding of your unlife, I assure you

 

[CornBurrito]

why?

you'll be dead

you won't care who fucks you when your dead

and you will get the pounding of your unlife, I assure you

I don't care, but I don't think my family will want someone unattractive banging my corpse. The pictures are for them.

 

[Jenga]

I don't care, but I don't think my family will want someone unattractive banging my corpse. The pictures are for them.

your family has no right to say who or who not can fuck your corpse


you are 18+

a fully grown and dead legally responsible adult

 

[Days like these...]

Everyone talking about rights, what about the rights of those who object and don't want to drink this for whatever reason (moral, religious, icky) I guess their rights don't matter?

 

[ToxicAdam]

Everyone talking about rights, what about the rights of those who object and don't want to drink this for whatever reason (moral, religious, icky) I guess their rights don't matter?

Too late. Depending where you live, they already do this to cadavers donated to medical science and animals. Countless liters and liters of this soul juice is entering the water cycle all the time.

Also, you could get your state to ban the procedure like they did in New Hampshire in 2009.

 

[Shanadeus]

Too late. Depending where you live, they already do this to cadavers donated to medical science and animals. Countless liters and liters of this soul juice is entering the water cycle all the time.

Also, you could get your state to ban the procedure like they did in New Hampshire in 2009.

And I don't think it's a good idea to involve ickyness when it comes to laws.

The anti-gay marriage movement come in mind.

 

[Zenith]

Everyone talking about rights, what about the rights of those who object and don't want to drink this for whatever reason (moral, religious, icky) I guess their rights don't matter?

And still, no one has set out a moral argument past the comment that "it's immoral".

 

[Stinkles]

Poo poo also goes into the city sewers.

Agree with TA, seems like an arbitrary decision.

.

For the record I want to be cremated and have my ashes spread off the Na Pali cliffs in Kauai. Because then my friends can have a sweet vacation.

 

[Days like these...]

Too late. Depending where you live, they already do this to cadavers donated to medical science and animals. Countless liters and liters of this soul juice is entering the water cycle all the time.

Also, you could get your state to ban the procedure like they did in New Hampshire in 2009.

Who was it that said your rights end where mine start? I personally dont care I'm just sayin

 

[Dreams-Visions]

.

For the record I want to be cremated and have my ashes spread off the Na Pali cliffs in Kauai. Because then my friends can have a sweet vacation.

when you're old enough to worry about being dead and cremated, I'd assume your friends will be similarly aged...and might not want to be trying to climb mountains at 70+

 

[Days like these...]

Wait ...fuck? That dude more or less in a roundabout way say he's a necrophiliac and the other dude wants to get banged/eaten? Derail of the forever!

 

[Shanadeus]

Wait ...fuck? That dude more or less in a roundabout way say he's a necrophiliac and the other dude wants to get banged/eaten? Derail of the forever!

I think they're joking.

 

[Stinkles]

when you're old enough to worry about being dead and cremated, I'd assume your friends will be similarly aged...and might not want to be trying to climb mountains at 70+

There's a parking lot at the bottom. They can dump me in a rock pool.

 

[Slavik81]

Everyone talking about rights, what about the rights of those who object and don't want to drink this for whatever reason (moral, religious, icky) I guess their rights don't matter?

Because the objection is nonsense. Your drinking water today has particles floating in it from millions of years of life and death of all kinds of creatures.

The air you breath is full of carbon dioxide from the remains of those who have been cremated. The food you eat contains molecules from the dead of thousands of years.

It is fundamentally impossible to dispose of human remains in a reasonable way while ensuring that no person ever comes in contact with their component molecules again.

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

Because the objection is nonsense. Your drinking water today has particles floating in it from millions of years of life and death of all kinds of creatures.

The air you breath is full of carbon dioxide from the remains of those who have been cremated. The food you eat contains molecules from the dead of thousands of years.

It is fundamentally impossible to dispose of human remains in a reasonable way while ensuring that no person ever comes in contact with their component molecules again.

It's not impossible. It's just impractical. And stupid to even try.

 

[Shanadeus]

Everyone talking about rights, what about the rights of those who object and don't want to drink this for whatever reason (moral, religious, icky) I guess their rights don't matter?

What do you say about people who object to drinking poo poo?

 

[Days like these...]

Because the objection is nonsense. Your drinking water today has particles floating in it from millions of years of life and death of all kinds of creatures.

The air you breath is full of carbon dioxide from the remains of those who have been cremated. The food you eat contains molecules from the dead of thousands of years.

It is fundamentally impossible to dispose of human remains in a reasonable way while ensuring that no person ever comes in contact with their component molecules again.

I'm not saying its not nonsense but then we start down a slippery slope. Should we civilize rainforest tribes cause we know better than they do and their objection to modern society is nonsense?

 

[robochimp]

I wonder where the judge thinks blood from Hospitals ends up.

First Google search is actually an informative flyer from Ohio

http://www.epa.state.oh.us/portals/34/document/guidance/gd_105.pdf

 

[Slavik81]

I'm not saying its not nonsense but then we start down a slippery slope. Should we civilize rainforest tribes cause we know better than they do and their objection to modern society is nonsense?

You have to accept that there are some resources in this world that are shared. Their joint management means that people need to come up with reasonable regulations for that sharing.

You can't invoke 'your rights begin where my rights end' because it's also the case that 'my rights begin where your rights end'. The discussion is about where that line should be.

And the discussion about where that line should be must be decided on rational grounds after a discussion between all affected parties.

Ultimately, somebody isn't going to like the outcome. But they're going to have to live with it, because it's not possible to please everyone all the time.

 

[Days like these...]

You have to accept that there are some resources in this world that are shared. Their joint management means that people need to come up with reasonable regulations for that sharing.

You can't invoke 'your rights begin where my rights end' because it's also the case that 'my rights begin where your rights end'. The discussion is about where that line should be.

And the discussion about where that line should be must be decided on rational grounds after a discussion between all affected parties.

Ultimately, somebody isn't going to like the outcome. But they're going to have to live with it, because it's not possible to please everyone all the time.

That is a very well thought out response for those who object.

 

[Zenith]

That is a very well thought out response for those who object.

...But it has no bearing on this specific scenario. It's just a very general message about sharing.

 

[Squirrel Killer]

And those regulatory gears probably wouldn't turn at all if no one make a fuzz about this and point out how stupid it is to stop this process when it sounds better than the alternatives.

Actually, they are turning.

Read the Dispatch articles ToxicAdam and I have linked. No one is raising a fuss over this process except for that it hasn't been approved yet by the state Department of Health (aside from half-read posters here recoiling at the ickiness factor.) The funeral director filed for a restraining order only so that he could use the process before it had been approved. The judge only denied the restraining order because he felt it wasn't his place to override the Department of Health's established mechanisms for approving methods of handling human remains and because there's no irreparable harm occurring to Edwards' business. This article indicates is already legal in Minnesota, and the Columbus Dispatch article indicates that efforts are underway in California, Florida, Nebraska, New Hampshire, and New York to make it legal there too.

Not everything that some random person posts is worthy of getting your dander up. This is one of those. The process isn't approved now, but there's nothing to indicate that it won't soon be approved. That's one of the reasons I took ToxicAdam to task about the mostly content-free article he posted in the OP, this isn't that big of a deal, but there's not enough information in that article to know that.

I wonder where the judge thinks blood from Hospitals ends up.

Read the Dispatch articles. The judge didn't refuse to issue the restraining order because of the sewer issue.

 

[Casp0r]

Oh my god.

This is now what I want to be when i die.