When you die, or the moment anyone you know passes away they (the deceased, the body) become property of the state. The once entity at some stage is required to be recorded as deceased, no longer a living entity.
When you’re alive you are a subject of the state, I suppose.
To what extent are the deceased an entity, and are all dead equal this way.
Can you put it in your diary to post a report when it happens to you?
>When you die, or the moment anyone you know passes away they (the deceased, the body) become property of the state.
Well the state hasn’t bothered to claim Dad yet, who’s still safely packed away in a suitcase in the sunroom. The state normally leaves it up to the next of kin to arrange suitably respectful disposal of dead bodies, as long as they observe the relevant regulations.
>When you’re alive you are a subject of the state, I suppose.
A citizen, normally, which is a status involving rights and responsibilities that are supposed to apply to everyone holding citizenship.
>To what extent are the deceased an entity, and are all dead equal this way.
Dead bodies are essentially “remains” that need to be processed before they become a health hazard. But the rights and responsibilities of the former citizen are still respected to some extent when dealing with their estate, and any outstanding claims against them that can be settled etc.
And of course everyone leaves a legacy of memories and in some cases, good works for others to enjoy.
Bubblecar said:
>When you die, or the moment anyone you know passes away they (the deceased, the body) become property of the state.Well the state hasn’t bothered to claim Dad yet, who’s still safely packed away in a suitcase in the sunroom. The state normally leaves it up to the next of kin to arrange suitably respectful disposal of dead bodies, as long as they observe the relevant regulations.
>When you’re alive you are a subject of the state, I suppose.
A citizen, normally, which is a status involving rights and responsibilities that are supposed to apply to everyone holding citizenship.
>To what extent are the deceased an entity, and are all dead equal this way.
Dead bodies are essentially “remains” that need to be processed before they become a health hazard. But the rights and responsibilities of the former citizen are still respected to some extent when dealing with their estate, and any outstanding claims against them that can be settled etc.
And of course everyone leaves a legacy of memories and in some cases, good works for others to enjoy.
Registered as deceased I expect, and it wasn’t a backyard cremation, but more to my point what if whatever example wasn’t registered as deceased and you did perform a backyard cremation, how might you tidy up the transition from living entity to otherwise, minus the magic the state performs.
And of this….But the rights and responsibilities of the former citizen are still respected to some extent when dealing with their estate, can you give me an example of that which or of what that maybe not respected, because it seems implicit in the propostion that there’s territory for that.
>how might you tidy up the transition from living entity to otherwise, minus the magic the state performs.
It’s not magic, just legal considerations, some of which are obviously sensible. The state needs to know the citizen is no more, so they don’t keep paying them a pension or expecting taxes etc.
>And of this….But the rights and responsibilities of the former citizen are still respected to some extent when dealing with their estate, can you give me an example of that which or of what that maybe not respected, because it seems implicit in the propostion that there’s territory for that.
I’m no legal expert, but wills can be contested, and if there’s no will, the stated wishes of the deceased carry little weight. And creditors may have to abandon their rightful claims.
Bubblecar said:
>how might you tidy up the transition from living entity to otherwise, minus the magic the state performs.It’s not magic, just legal considerations, some of which are obviously sensible. The state needs to know the citizen is no more, so they don’t keep paying them a pension or expecting taxes etc.
>And of this….But the rights and responsibilities of the former citizen are still respected to some extent when dealing with their estate, can you give me an example of that which or of what that maybe not respected, because it seems implicit in the propostion that there’s territory for that.
I’m no legal expert, but wills can be contested, and if there’s no will, the stated wishes of the deceased carry little weight. And creditors may have to abandon their rightful claims.
All true
The state awaits its subjects (needs them to exist) before born, and stipulates the formalities of declaring the entity no more at the end.
It’s something of that above I mention (the influence) in the in-between living period that interests me.
i’m exploring the invisible aspects of the state (media inclusive, hence the other thread), exploring the possibility spaces that are obliviated, that involves obliviation, and operates within that obliviated.
not an entirely sane interest within that apparent of what is agreed to be real maybe, but I have this outrageous notion that a good part of social reality is what it is because of what it denies exists, in a sense, so am looking for something to extinguish the notion.
transition said:
i’m exploring the invisible aspects of the state (media inclusive, hence the other thread), exploring the possibility spaces that are obliviated, that involves obliviation, and operates within that obliviated.not an entirely sane interest within that apparent of what is agreed to be real maybe, but I have this outrageous notion that a good part of social reality is what it is because of what it denies exists, in a sense, so am looking for something to extinguish the notion.
or in other words you wish to deny that it exists?
roughbarked said:
transition said:
i’m exploring the invisible aspects of the state (media inclusive, hence the other thread), exploring the possibility spaces that are obliviated, that involves obliviation, and operates within that obliviated.not an entirely sane interest within that apparent of what is agreed to be real maybe, but I have this outrageous notion that a good part of social reality is what it is because of what it denies exists, in a sense, so am looking for something to extinguish the notion.
or in other words you wish to deny that it exists?
dunno, no idea what it might be after the effort of trying to extinguish something that doesn’t exist, of that attenuated apparent
transition said:
When you die, or the moment anyone you know passes away they (the deceased, the body) become property of the state.
But in the UK it had been an well-established principle of law that there is no ‘property’ in, nor ‘ownership’ right to, a dead body. This changed in1998 because of a theft of anatomical specimens. The human corpse has a value through organ transplants, body donated to science, expense of preservation and storage, value for artistic purposes, and participation in mythbusters.
the queen “owns” all unmarked mute swans. she usually just restricts this ownership to the thames and some tributaries.
JudgeMental said:
the queen “owns” all unmarked mute swans. she usually just restricts this ownership to the thames and some tributaries.
Can’t have swan for supper every night, she’d soon tire of it.
JudgeMental said:
the queen “owns” all unmarked mute swans. she usually just restricts this ownership to the thames and some tributaries.
Is it the queen who pays the swan minders to count them?
Bubblecar said:
JudgeMental said:
the queen “owns” all unmarked mute swans. she usually just restricts this ownership to the thames and some tributaries.
Can’t have swan for supper every night, she’d soon tire of it.
It was how the law came about though.
roughbarked said:
Bubblecar said:
JudgeMental said:
the queen “owns” all unmarked mute swans. she usually just restricts this ownership to the thames and some tributaries.
Can’t have swan for supper every night, she’d soon tire of it.
It was how the law came about though.
mollwollfumble said:
transition said:
When you die, or the moment anyone you know passes away they (the deceased, the body) become property of the state.
Are you sure about that? Whales, dolphins, porpoises and sturgeon become the personal property of the monach of the uk when they die. The monach also owns all live swans.But in the UK it had been an well-established principle of law that there is no ‘property’ in, nor ‘ownership’ right to, a dead body. This changed in1998 because of a theft of anatomical specimens. The human corpse has a value through organ transplants, body donated to science, expense of preservation and storage, value for artistic purposes, and participation in mythbusters.
If the state made_non-ownership_ law (of the newly deceased, for example), then it (the body) is subject to the law courtesy the state(those that act in accordance can be said to act for). That the procedures associated with might be performed at some more local level doesn’t change the part the state plays in the procedure. I can’t secede and set up a cemetery or crematorium, for example.
Just chucking ideas around here.
What of when an autopsy is required, who owns (exercises power over) the body leading up to and during that? And what of the period in which an autopsy is being determined to be necessary or not?
transition said:
mollwollfumble said:
transition said:
When you die, or the moment anyone you know passes away they (the deceased, the body) become property of the state.
Are you sure about that? Whales, dolphins, porpoises and sturgeon become the personal property of the monach of the uk when they die. The monach also owns all live swans.But in the UK it had been an well-established principle of law that there is no ‘property’ in, nor ‘ownership’ right to, a dead body. This changed in1998 because of a theft of anatomical specimens. The human corpse has a value through organ transplants, body donated to science, expense of preservation and storage, value for artistic purposes, and participation in mythbusters.
If the state made_non-ownership_ law (of the newly deceased, for example), then it (the body) is subject to the law courtesy the state(those that act in accordance can be said to act for). That the procedures associated with might be performed at some more local level doesn’t change the part the state plays in the procedure. I can’t secede and set up a cemetery or crematorium, for example.
Just chucking ideas around here.
What of when an autopsy is required, who owns (exercises power over) the body leading up to and during that? And what of the period in which an autopsy is being determined to be necessary or not?
That makes sense.
Have you looked up the law handbook?
http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/09_05_00_funerals/
eg. http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/09_05_02_burial_cremation_and_donation_of_remains/
http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/09_05_00_funerals/
Persons with lawful custody of a body may permit it to undergo anatomical examination unless to their knowledge the deceased, during their lifetime, either in writing or verbally in the presence of two or more witnesses during the final illness, expressed the wish that their body should not undergo such examination, or unless the surviving spouse or senior next of kin requires the body to be interred or cremated without such examination. The body of any person who dies in a public hospital or other public institution may, in some circumstances, be used for anatomical research.
the experience might be somewhat different i’d expect in the case of a criminal matter, when a body is evidence.
transition said:
When you die, or the moment anyone you know passes away they (the deceased, the body) become property of the state. The once entity at some stage is required to be recorded as deceased, no longer a living entity.When you’re alive you are a subject of the state, I suppose.
To what extent are the deceased an entity, and are all dead equal this way.
if you area foetus you are in some cases a non entity/ non human meaning that you can be killed at will
funny old thing law ain’t it?
wookiemeister said:
transition said:
When you die, or the moment anyone you know passes away they (the deceased, the body) become property of the state. The once entity at some stage is required to be recorded as deceased, no longer a living entity.When you’re alive you are a subject of the state, I suppose.
To what extent are the deceased an entity, and are all dead equal this way.
The big trick is to get to write it, (the law)
the law decides if you are alive or deadif you area foetus you are in some cases a non entity/ non human meaning that you can be killed at will
funny old thing law ain’t it?
The main argument of the anti-choice movement boils down to this: a human zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus is a human being with a right to life, and abortion is therefore murder and should be illegal. This assumption is deeply flawed.
http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/fetusperson.shtml
in sparta a baby was examined at birth and if found wanting was taken to mount taygetus and hurled from a precipice
perfectly acceptable within that state
in india and other cultures (note : culture and society isnt the same as civilisation) females may be killed in the womb or at birth
perfectly acceptable in their state in practical terms
>In early childhood services you have to announce that you are leaving the room and where you are going. It’s taken me years to stop making the announcement: “I’m going to the loo” when out at restaurants.
You’ve had your basic desires regards toileting socially mediated since a toddler, the sublimation starts with accidents when in nappies and being potty trained, later at school there’s a further development of this and your anal sphincter action etc (that part of your brain that controls it) is further socially mediated, and with that an elevation occurs, your higher cognitive functions are directed to expected tasks, compliance to social expectations etc.
It’s the way, consequently socially mediated arse holes abound. Quite an effective introduction to dissembling and civilization too.