Do you find this morally wrong?

Skidder said:
Rummaging through a freshly covered over grave in the municipal cemetery in the hope of finding a few gold fillings is wrong. An archaeological dig with an aim to better understand the past is quite different surely.
Click to expand...
I agree to a point but I tend to be in two minds about this in general. How many years have to have passed before it's acceptable to disturb (in this case) a 2 year old childs grave and take whatever you like the look of to put on display? Is there a reason the child and items could not (should not?) be respectfully re-interred once the items have been catalogued, photographed etc?

Would it be morally wrong to dig up a Victorian grave yard and stick anything of value you find on display? How about a WWII cemetery? At what point do moral considerations expire in the name of looking at something shiny in a glass case?
 
craptakular said:
I agree archeaology should be banned. Things were done for a reason we shouldn't be digging anything up, especially graves of children.

This sickens me.
Click to expand...

Totally agree, screw all the amazing discoveries that have been made that have allowed significant advances in science and history (evolution anyone? Dinosaurs?). Life would be so much better without knowledge.
 
Macro said:
I agree to a point but I tend to be in two minds about this in general. How many years have to have passed before it's acceptable to disturb (in this case) a 2 year old childs grave and take whatever you like the look of to put on display? Is there a reason the child and items could not (should not?) be respectfully re-interred once the items have been catalogued, photographed etc?

Would it be morally wrong to dig up a Victorian grave yard and stick anything of value you find on display? How about a WWII cemetery? At what point do moral considerations expire in the name of looking at something shiny in a glass case?
Click to expand...

Just to add, it's now illegal in most states to bury people with valuable belongings. I don't know if that's the case here yet.
 
Cure for cancer found in grave, archeologists decide to leave it there as it's morally wrong to take it.
 
Iamzod said:
Doesn't bother me in the slightest. if it was more recent then sure i'd say it's wrong, but it's what how old? 1500 - 2000 years.

I wouldn't care what anyone does to my grave in the year 4000, it's going to get dug up or destroyed at some stage wether that be in 2000, 20000 or 2000000 years.

In some ways it'd be nice to think that something i've owned survives and is on display in the year 4000.
Click to expand...

+1
 
You seem to be missing something. There is a hell of a difference taking something when it could actually advance mankind and taking a small ornament from a grave. Something that will in no way advance civilization.

I actually like archaeology. I found the whole Richard III discovery fascinating. However, once all the necessary tests, samples, scans and what have you are finished, they are respectfully reinterring him. Why cant they do that with this piece once all records are completed?

I don't know how many people are actually going to want to see something that's been taken from a dead child's grave.
 
Skyfall said:
Cure for cancer found in grave, archeologists decide to leave it there as it's morally wrong to take it.
Click to expand...
Is this even remotely likely? There's a difference between advancing our understanding of the world in which we live, our history and potentially contributing to civilisation in general and taking a small ornament laid in a childs grave by grieving parents in the belief it might comfort her in whatever they believed came after death so you can put it on display in a glass case.
 
nope,

if we were this sensitive, then half of America would not have been built, they had to relocate thousands of Native American graves, and built over many more,

there are many more examples
 
in 2000 years, I wonder if archaeologists digging up the graves of children from 2013 will be pondering the cultural significance of the Happy Meal toy they were buried with.
 
Last edited:
I don't see a problem with it aslong as a significant period of time has elapsed and it is done respectfully out of a wish to understand the past and not motivated by greed.
 
I really doubt there would be this bizarre outrage if it wasn't a child's grave.

Also this has been going on for hundreds of years, where do people think the majority of artefacts come from?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom