What's new
By:
Filters

The Stuffie, Sir Malo's ear porn talk and Ulmf's derp thread.


5a6c5eefda909.jpeg


So the dog downstairs is not a boy. :unsure:
 
Entertainment value for this specific topic has been lost a while ago. It's boring at this point, don't care.
 
Zepheral said:
6e161f6412f6d854d261a2dfa7812c5c--bait-memes.jpg


Yoshiiki in a nutshell.....


Plus note.
5a9ff7602e3a4.jpeg


Is it? :unsure:
Click to expand...
As much of a bait it is, I am still going to bother.
Humans have rights, even bodies of ones that passed away (thus, burial grounds and all ceremonies related to it), so even after the fact of loss of life, body by proxy keeps some rights of person that was alive (just like murder victim is considered a victim). By that - not a victimless crime. Moral dilemma is another issue and while closely related, not exactly needed.
 
Yoshiiki said:
As much of a bait it is, I am still going to bother.
Humans have rights, even bodies of ones that passed away (thus, burial grounds and all ceremonies related to it), so even after the fact of loss of life, body by proxy keeps some rights of person that was alive (just like murder victim is considered a victim). By that - not a victimless crime. Moral dilemma is another issue and while closely related, not exactly needed.
Click to expand...

Yoshiiki is basically Lennenkanpt at this point.
 

Attachments

  • 1485320527336.jpg
    1485320527336.jpg
    746.8 KB · Views: 14
Also it victimises the next of kin
Even if you dont consider the body to have rights, it technically belongs to the next of kin for burial/cremation purposes

Similarly, if someone fucks your toaster, chair, or a drinking glass you own without your consent, that's also a crime
 
Ninja_Named_Bob said:
Yoshiiki is basically Lennenkanpt at this point.
Click to expand...
I don't have such manly mustache.
XSI said:
Also it victimises the next of kin
Even if you dont consider the body to have rights, it technically belongs to the next of kin for burial/cremation purposes

Similarly, if someone fucks your toaster, chair, or a drinking glass you own without your consent, that's also a crime
Click to expand...
Yeah, I thought of this variant too, but it can be exploited by question itself. If you do something to a person, that one is the victim, not their family. Problem with that analogy is reasoning in same manner as things, which can be turned into monetary compensation and while owner got victimized, there was no harm done to the person itself. So with that approach, technically there is no victim and that's what this question is based on.
Or to put it simply: Things don't have rights. That's why body having some rights by proxy of being alive earlier is a better idea, as we don't dehumanize as much and don't turn it into an object. So therefore, it can be a victim just like animals can be victims of animal cruelty while not being able to speak for themselves (and there are ways to determine if something was done to an animal).
With objects there is a lot of moral talking (like non monetary value), so I simply dropped an idea since I could easily refute it myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top