|
Grex > Cinema > #68: Grex goes to the movies - The Summer Movies Review Item |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 323 responses total. |
rcurl
|
|
response 263 of 323:
| 
Sep 12 06:21 UTC 2004 |
And how are all cemetaries going to be maintained in-perpetuity? They aren't.
Buring just delays the inevitable - and at great cost with no benefits.
|
bru
|
|
response 264 of 323:
|
Sep 12 07:19 UTC 2004 |
cremation is a good, sound solution with no religious drawbacks that I know
of. (in my opinion) not as good as being ground into mulch, which would be
more environmentally friendly.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 265 of 323:
|
Sep 12 15:13 UTC 2004 |
I believe that Dick Cheney's energy council is working on a way that
bodies of poor people can be converted directly into oil, without
needing to decompose for lots of years first.
|
other
|
|
response 266 of 323:
|
Sep 12 15:15 UTC 2004 |
Before or after they're finished with them?
|
marcvh
|
|
response 267 of 323:
|
Sep 12 17:42 UTC 2004 |
That depends how successful "compassionate conservatism" is, but just
the executions in Texas should allow them to have Hummers for some time
to come.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 268 of 323:
|
Sep 12 20:11 UTC 2004 |
My brother-in-law died and was cremated earlier this year. We hired a boat
and had a party on Tampa Bay, and distributed his ashes there: appropriate
too, as he had a degree in marine biology. This apparently against the
law, but the wind was too high to go out into the Gulf. I think that they
fear that Tampa Bay would get filled in, if it is allowed. But then they
could build more condominiums on, say, Ash Acres.
|
drew
|
|
response 269 of 323:
|
Sep 12 20:31 UTC 2004 |
Re #265:
I thought they were going to make red, yellow, and green food wafers
out of them instead.
|
tod
|
|
response 270 of 323:
|
Sep 12 21:25 UTC 2004 |
Just the terrorists
|
krokus
|
|
response 271 of 323:
|
Sep 13 01:28 UTC 2004 |
re 262
Actually being buried isn't environmentally unfriendly. But the way
that people are burid in modern times is.
|
twenex
|
|
response 272 of 323:
|
Sep 13 02:30 UTC 2004 |
Yeah. I don't agree with cremation, as I don't see it as natural, any more
than I see the opening of a coffin at a funeral natural. And if it's a case
of not bothering to delay the inevitable, you might as well get someone to
shoot you now; you're going to die sometime anyway.
|
richard
|
|
response 273 of 323:
|
Sep 13 03:30 UTC 2004 |
#272...cremation is a lot more natural than spending thousands of dollars so
you can be buried whole in a fancy box with a marble monument to yourself,
taking up eternally a piece of land that you don't possibly need. It is also
a fact that there are not enough cemetaries or places for cemetaries left
anyway.
You can always be frozen. Ted Williams was frozen. Then his daughter sued
his son. The son wanted him frozen. The daughter wanted him thawed out and
cremated. They settled out of court. Ted is still frozen. He's taking up
space in a refrigerator, which is using electricity. Total waste.
|
twenex
|
|
response 274 of 323:
|
Sep 13 03:33 UTC 2004 |
So buy a wooden box.
|
twenex
|
|
response 275 of 323:
|
Sep 13 03:35 UTC 2004 |
As for Ted Willians, being buried fashionably must be about the most decadent
thing one can arrange for on God's polluted Earth.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 276 of 323:
|
Sep 13 05:44 UTC 2004 |
I think cremation has a lot of beauty to it. Your substance returns quickly
(if spread) to the natural world from which it came. It is the ultimate
personal recycling. Above-ground burials - laying out - is similar, but
in crowded area creates some danger. Indians and Zorastrians practiced
this. The recycling is also rather rapid as scavengers eat what they
need.
Re #272: what's unnatural about cremation? All humans on earth will be
cremated in the distant future when the sun expands into a red giant.
Also, I was speaking of the inevitable for inanimate objects - bodies. I
have no reason to deny people living out their natural lives. But when
one dies, that is the end of the person's conscious presence. I see no
sense in extolling the corpse.
|
twenex
|
|
response 277 of 323:
|
Sep 13 14:00 UTC 2004 |
The chances of anyone being alive by the time the sun expands into a red giant
are not good.
I don't like cremation. It may be irrational. But I don't like the idea of
a body burning up like that.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 278 of 323:
|
Sep 13 15:24 UTC 2004 |
You like better the idea of it decomposing into a putrid glob of bacteria and
molds?
|
twenex
|
|
response 279 of 323:
|
Sep 13 15:32 UTC 2004 |
Yes.
Not in the kitchen, but in the ground, yes.
|
mfp
|
|
response 280 of 323:
|
Sep 13 15:33 UTC 2004 |
Who cares what ideas you like?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 281 of 323:
|
Sep 13 15:40 UTC 2004 |
I'd like to know from twenex the precise bases for his preference for
corporeal putrifaction over combustion.
|
twenex
|
|
response 282 of 323:
|
Sep 13 15:46 UTC 2004 |
I don't think it's natural.
I believe the link between spirit and body is too strong to justify breaking
it by incineration of the body.
|
gregb
|
|
response 283 of 323:
|
Sep 13 15:58 UTC 2004 |
Getting back to MOVIES...
Finally caught Shrek 2 at the dollar show Saturday. Really enjoyed it.
To me, the commercials I'd seen didn't impress me much, but those folks
at Dreamworks have a knack of fooling you that way. Like the first,
there's a lot to take in, but it's worth it. There's more good tunes,
in-jokes, and a twist on the whole Fairy God-Mother persona. If you
liked the first, Shrek 2 is definitely worth adding to your movie list.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 284 of 323:
|
Sep 13 16:06 UTC 2004 |
Re #282: if you believe in "spirits", for which there is no evidence. When
an animal dies the only thing we know that remains is useless flesh. Why
invoke mystical "spirits" out of nothing?
|
twenex
|
|
response 285 of 323:
|
Sep 13 16:10 UTC 2004 |
There is evidence. It's just that atheists and materialists choose to ignore
it, or confuse "evidence" with "proof". If there's no such thing as a spirit,
why do people have a consciousness? Why aren't they just like the totem poles
the Native Americans constructed, or the statues Abraham's father worshipped
- or, at most, like mindless automata? Even animals have emotions, and anyone
who says they don't probably hasn't spend more than 2 seconds with an animal.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 286 of 323:
|
Sep 13 16:16 UTC 2004 |
Re #285, I think it's more like some people confusing "evidence" with
"anecdotes" or "wishful thinking." There's no reason to suppose there
is a connection between consciousness and a "spirit" any more than that
there is a connection between emotions and a "spirit" or having
eyelashes and a "spirit."
|
mfp
|
|
response 287 of 323:
|
Sep 13 16:19 UTC 2004 |
How can my computer do calculations if it doesn't have a spirit?!
|