dont ever move to a big city

LuxLuthor

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
10,629
Location
MS
Really? That's genuinely how you feel? I thought you'd be upset, even angry with me for my previous comment. But, you absolutely blind-sided me with your response.

You're just assuming they didn't care about their Lives. Many of them absolutely do. But due to horrific addictions or horrific mental illnesses for which they literally can't get any treatment for in America, they're stuck being homeless. Doesn't mean they don't care. Everyone has a basic human right to their own bodies. Unless a person signed a waiver while alive, signed the back of their driver's license, or the family who claimed the body, then said, "We know he'd want to have his body used for medical research," then there's a huge problem.... That person, for personal or religious reasons, might not want their body cut up or dissected for any cause/justification another person could come up with. Just because they're Homeless, doesn't mean their rights get taken away.

You have valid concerns, but for a homeless person with no relatives, no driver's license organ donor question, and no idea if they cared about their body after death (and there is not a lot of evidence in the extreme cases that they care about their lives looking at how they live--you just assumed the opposite that they do based on your personal feelings)....I honestly do not see much difference in their being cremated or used respectfully first as a cadaver, after which they are cremated.

You make it seem like they are somehow being desecrated or disrespected as a cadaver which I don't agree with.
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
19,622
Location
NYC
The main difference is the part where you said, used respectfully.
You're concentrating on the "respectfully" part. But there's an issue with that. That's based on your moral outlook. I'm concentrating on the "used" aspect. You don't see a difference. I do.

Also, I'm not making things seem any way at all. You're right, we'll never agree on this. If a person while they were alive had very real moral, religious, or personal reasons for not wanting to be "used" as a cadaver; and never gave consent for their body to be cut open.... then yes, doing so would be disrespectful to their wishes and a desecration of their body.

If anything, this unfortunately timed exchange between us has convinced me to contact all of my loved ones, including my best friend of 35 years and make it clear how I want my body to be handled after I'm gone. No need for any misunderstandings.
 

LuxLuthor

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
10,629
Location
MS
Also, I'm not making things seem any way at all. You're right, we'll never agree on this. If a person while they were alive had very real moral, religious, or personal reasons for not wanting to be "used" as a cadaver; and never gave consent for their body to be cut open.... then yes, doing so would be disrespectful to their wishes and a desecration of their body.

And my point is that you cannot assume (based on your feelings) that any person had moral, religious, or personal reasons for not wanting to be used as a cadaver. That is only your personal view with no basis to justify it with a person lacking any relative, donor designation, or healthcare directives.

I see little difference with someone in authority deciding on their own to cremate a person (where some religions mandate burial) vs. cadaver use. Both instances are imposed on a deceased, unclaimed, unspecified body, and each can be done in a respectful manner.

In many other instances involving foul play a body is mandated to undergo an autopsy and cut open with much less respect that we gave to cadavers--even if they had clear personal written or family directives. You can't have it both ways.
 

IMA SOL MAN

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
May 18, 2023
Messages
2,126
Location
The HEART of the USA.
During the pandemic, I think when the bodies were piling up in NYC, they probably cremated them without regard to pre-planned funerals specifying burial in previously purchased lots, or family wishes. The immediate priority was disease prevention and cadaver disposal. I don't know for sure about that, as I didn't follow the NYC body disposal story in the news, but I believe I heard something like that, perhaps one of our NYC members can clarify what happened to all the COVID-19 victims that piled up outside NYC hospitals.
 

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
7,506
Location
Flushing, NY
During the pandemic, I think when the bodies were piling up in NYC, they probably cremated them without regard to pre-planned funerals specifying burial in previously purchased lots, or family wishes. The immediate priority was disease prevention and cadaver disposal. I don't know for sure about that, as I didn't follow the NYC body disposal story in the news, but I believe I heard something like that, perhaps one of our NYC members can clarify what happened to all the COVID-19 victims that piled up outside NYC hospitals.
With over 25K dying in the span of weeks, funeral homes and cremation services were overwhelmed. We were storing the bodies outside hospitals in refrigerated trailers until arrangements could be made. There were four trailers outside my brother's hospital alone, probably dozens, even hundreds, citiwide. As far as I know, we weren't cremating people unless that's what their families wanted.

With the restrictions in place, there were obviously no wakes or viewing of bodies, but I think family members could be present when their loved ones were buried, or put in mausoleums.

Here's a few links that might be helpful:





In India I heard they were just piling up the bodies and burning them. Had the mortality rate been much higher, we probably would have done the same.
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
19,622
Location
NYC
And my point is that you cannot assume (based on your feelings) that any person had moral, religious, or personal reasons for not wanting to be used as a cadaver. That is only your personal view with no basis to justify it with a person lacking any relative, donor designation, or healthcare directives.

I see little difference with someone in authority deciding on their own to cremate a person (where some religions mandate burial) vs. cadaver use. Both instances are imposed on a deceased, unclaimed, unspecified body, and each can be done in a respectful manner.

In many other instances involving foul play a body is mandated to undergo an autopsy and cut open with much less respect that we gave to cadavers--even if they had clear personal written or family directives. You can't have it both ways.
Here's the thing though.... MY point is that YOU cannot assume (based on YOUR feelings) that any person DIDN'T have moral, religious, or personal reasons.... You see where I'm going with this? And honestly, you're wrong. It is not ONLY my personal point of view with NO basis to justify it. It's based on human psychology. It's the very reason why waivers exist! It's the very reason why that declaration is on the back of every single U.S. civilian's Driver's License! Even the State recognizes basic human psychology. The one pertaining to most folks not wanting their bodies to be carved up after death like some sort of slab of beef at an Industrial Butcher's processing plant.

We're not two different sides of the same coin. Your point of view doesn't take basic human psychology into account. Mine does. Mine is grounded in basic human decency for those who suffered horribly while alive. Yours is grounded in, "Well, these people likely hated themselves and thus would have no objections to being carved up by medical students. The fact that signed waivers don't exist, means nothing."

You see no difference, I do. Again, YOUR definition of respectful isn't necessarily the definition that others hold. From what you've mentioned during our exchange, it's more about making medical students FEEL better for cutting open Homeless people who likely didn't want their bodies to be cut open in the first place! And again, no; that is not simply my opinion. That is human psychology. You can't just say that these people THOUGHT themselves to be worthless, so we're free to treat them that way.

What about individuals who try to end their own lives? Clearly, such individuals who climb onto bridges or outside of tall buildings with the intention of jumping, they obviously THINK they are worthless. So, of course police arrive to keep crowds back.... And to encourage such individuals to jump. No?? Well, based on your perspective, that's how the real world works, doesn't it? Oh, I suppose not. Yeah, sorry. You don't get to make yourself feel better by pretending that it's okay to carve up homeless people because they themselves PROBABLY thought they were worthless. Combined with, "Well the cause is a good one. So that justifies it all."

Thanks for proving my point. People can justify all sorts of horrific acts in their own minds. (It was done in a respectful manner.... The cause is an important one.... They themselves most likely thought they were worthless. So why should we actually care about them.... Someone else decided it was okay to carve into them after they expired. Sure that someone wasn't a family member. But that's good enough to assuage my conscience....Did I miss any? I mean those were the main points you brought up.)

I'm not having it both ways. Foul play isn't even part of this discussion. Never was. We're discussing basic human decency in how the Homeless are treated after they expire of causes not involving having their lives ended by someone else. And quite frankly, you're on the opposite side of basic human decency. But perhaps nowadays basic human decency is too much to ask for? Oops! Did that pesky Idealist side of my personality escape, and make his way to CPF? Hold on, I'll go check to see if he's still in his cage.
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
19,622
Location
NYC
During the pandemic, I think when the bodies were piling up in NYC, they probably cremated them without regard to pre-planned funerals specifying burial in previously purchased lots, or family wishes. The immediate priority was disease prevention and cadaver disposal. I don't know for sure about that, as I didn't follow the NYC body disposal story in the news, but I believe I heard something like that, perhaps one of our NYC members can clarify what happened to all the COVID-19 victims that piled up outside NYC hospitals.
Planetary Pandemic involving thousands upon thousands of deaths daily, with highly contagious bodies. Obviously we're talking about a horrendous national Emergency. Ironically at first, our Big City funeral homes had plenty of body bags (in case of another Terror attack similar to 9/11 should occur). Those ran out after a couple of weeks.

Local, State, and Federal politicians were too worried about their upcoming re-election campaigns, so were too gutless and cowardly to declare a State of Emergency and mobilize Reservists to properly enforce Emergency measures.

In NYC, freezer trucks were used to hold over-flow of bodies before they could be disposed of. When the scandal was exposed, most folks didn't respond with horror. Again, Planetary Pandemic. Some family members of deceased individuals were very upset. Admittedly so. But ironically some who were interviewed said they understood why such measures were being taken. This wasn't business as usual. And clearly, on a Normal day their deceased loved ones would not be treated in such a manner. Heck, if things were Normal; their loved ones would still be alive.

Our idiot Governor at the time converted the Jacob Javits Convention Center into an emergency hospital for Covid patients. It was certainly big enough to do the job. But bureaucrats were put in charge of processing patients instead of individuals with actual experience in running large hospitals. So, processing patients in was a convoluted, moronically mismanaged nightmare. Nurses got so fed up that one of them sent an internal memo to the Press. It highlighted the 22 Step check-in process that all arriving potential patients had to "pass" in order to be admitted. Meaning they had to be a "Yes" on all 22 of the requirements!

When we needed Leaders, we got incompetent morons instead. After awhile, it was decided to convert the center for everyone who was ill, but not infected with Covid. Well, that went even worse! Hospitals have large, expensive, heavy medical equipment hooked up to treat patients. The Center, did not. And not as though all that equipment could just be trucked in and set up. So after several weeks, our idiot Governor decided to cover his own backside by announcing that infection rates had tapered off, (they did not) and thus the Center was no longer needed as a make-shift hospital.
 

LuxLuthor

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
10,629
Location
MS
We're discussing basic human decency in how the Homeless are treated after they expire of causes not involving having their lives ended by someone else. And quite frankly, you're on the opposite side of basic human decency.

This comes down to what you alone personally view as basic human decency. It doesn't apply to others view on this subject.

Your views do not matter on what should or should not happen in the event of an unclaimed body with no legal notices provided.

Somehow you can justify an authority deciding to cremate a body that may have had strong religious belief in a burial.

Somehow you can dismiss an autopsy that can be required whether foul play is involved or not.

No, this is you alone having decided that a body being used as a cadaver lacks basic human decency.

Obviously because it's done in cases of unclaimed bodies, your viewpoint, however idealistic you may feel on the subject, lacks merit, and does not in fact violate any basic human decency, as that would not allow it to be done so commonly.
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
19,622
Location
NYC
I'm sorry but that's B.S. People know what basic Human decency is. It's not a subjective term. And it doesn't come down to my personal outlook.

And who are you in this world that YOUR views matter more than anyone else's? Who are you again? Oh yes, the Ghoul who thinks it's okay to carve up Homeless human-beings because deep down you think they're worthless and have no rights to even their own bodies.

Somehow? So you're just going to pretend that cremation is just as horrible as carving into deceased human-beings who never gave their consent to do so. That's your point. Okay. Whatever makes you personally feel better about desicrating the body of another human-being. That seems to be your main focus.

Again, I'm not playing this silly game with you. I dismissed nothing. You brought up a topic that had nothing to do with this particular discussion. Also, if you want to continue. Okay, I'm calling you out on dismissing what I mentioned regarding Convicted murderers sentenced to death having more rights than Homeless people. I noticed you conveniently ignored that aspect I brought up.

No, it's you who has no basic human decency. Has nothing to do with just me. But thanks again for proving my point that people can justify the most horrific acts in their own minds, to themselves. Why look in the mirror when you can pretend you're a good person who has done nothing wrong. Right?

Nope sorry, you don't get to pretend that my point of view lacks merit and thus shouldn't be taken seriously. Nice little debating tactic. Doesn't work if the other person knows about it, and calls you out on it. And again, justifying in your own mind the horrific treatment of Homeless human-beings by saying, "Well, these are unclaimed bodies, so we can do whatever we want to them."

BTW, you forgot to mention that you're violating basic human decency but doing so in a "RESPECTFUL" manner. Might want to edit your last post there. And for me, it is your last post. I'm done with you. Welcome to my Ignore List. In all of my years of being on CPF I have literally never encountered anyone who deserved it more. You are in serious denial. But keep believing yourself to be a good man, a decent human-being. Whatever helps you sleep at night. You have no clue what the word "decency" means. If you did, you wouldn't think it was a subjective term.
 

RWT1405

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
1,262
Location
PA
I see a lot of kids on e-bikes, dirt bikes, and those stupid ATVs doing all sorts of really dumb things.

NYC needs to legalize yielding at stop signs or red signals precisely so police can go after those who *don't* yield. Also, if this behavior were legalized, any group teaching new cyclists would show them how to properly pass red signals. Right now those same groups won't touch that with a ten foot pole lest they be accused of encouraging illegal behavior.

For a bunch of reasons it's far safer for cyclists (and pedestrians) to go on red, but they also need to learn to do so safety (as well as when NOT to do it). I pass red signals all the time. I haven't even had a near miss, never mind an actual collision. I generally start scanning the cross street when I'm a block away. If there's a lot of cross traffic, I know I'm not going to be able to safely pass that red signal, so I just coast to the intersection. I try to adjust my speed so I hit the intersection just as the signal flips back to green, thereby avoiding a full stop. If traffic is light, I reduce speed to 8 to 10 mph before I reach the intersection. I cover my brake, continue to scan in both directions. Right before entering the intersection, I make my go/no go decision, depending upon what I see. If it's clear, I accelerate rapidly through the intersection to clear it as quickly as possible. If not, I slow or stop as needed to let anything coming pass, then accelerate through the intersection. This stuff isn't hard to teach novice riders.

Bottom line, there's zero reason for cyclists to blow red signals without slowing or looking. They're putting their own lives in jeopardy.

There is much we disagree on

On this I believe you are spot on!
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
19,622
Location
NYC
Just think, a homeless cadaver may lead to a disease being cured or a near blind kid being able to see.....
Realistically it leads to a med. student getting a grade.

Shortly after getting my Imalent MS12 Mini, showed it off to a co-worker. He was impressed. Said if a child ever went missing, I could use it to help the police locate him. Perhaps in a pitch-black park or ball-field. It was a nice little fantasy he came up with. The reality, far more bland and boring. I could use it to impress co-workers, friends, family, and acquaintances. Zero pragmatic reasons to own one. ZERO. I just wanted one.
 

alpg88

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
5,228
Just think, a homeless cadaver may lead to a disease being cured or a near blind kid being able to see.....

Most body parts only good for very short time after death, i think eyes and heart valves good for a day, it is the longest, Organ donations are negotiated before the person dies, and removed either right after death, or while that person still alive, they are basically killing the donor.
 

raggie33

*the raggedier*
Joined
Aug 11, 2003
Messages
13,363
Im starting to like small town life omg boring yes but I was just on Main Street here and I was alone I like being alone any other Main Street would be packed
 
Top