Swedish woman charged with having sex with a skeleton.

[New England and The Maritimes]

And because dead bodies don't have the ability to consent unless specified in their wills while they were living people, it's obvious that necrophilia shouldn't be a crime.

Oh wait, that's just loony. It would be scary that "Ignore" has more votes than "Prosecute," but I've realized that you should always expect the unexpected on NS.

"That's loony" isn't an argument. Just because logic takes you to conclusions with which you may be uncomfortable does not mean those conclusions should be rejected.

Dead bodies are merely objects - they have no Will with which they may consent. Frankly, I'm not sure as to how wills (as in, last will an testament, etc.) should be evaluated from an anarchocapitalist viewpoint (since the dead are merely matter - no consciousness/Will - must their "rights" be honored postmortem, given that they cease to have rights once they cease to have a Will?), so you may probably morally screw a skeleton even if its prior owner (in life) was against it. I suppose the family probably owns it, so they can exercise property rights to prevent necrophilia, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong with it (even violating the dead man's prior wishes).

I would say a will is merely a statement informing the inheritors of what you want to give to whom. For those respectful of your wishes, it clarifies a lot, but someone still has the right to sue if they feel they've been wrongfully excluded.

[Ostroeuropa]

"That's loony" isn't an argument. Just because logic takes you to conclusions with which you may be uncomfortable does not mean those conclusions should be rejected.

Dead bodies are merely objects - they have no Will with which they may consent. Frankly, I'm not sure as to how wills (as in, last will an testament, etc.) should be evaluated from an anarchocapitalist viewpoint (since the dead are merely matter - no consciousness/Will - must their "rights" be honored postmortem, given that they cease to have rights once they cease to have a Will?), so you may probably morally screw a skeleton even if its prior owner (in life) was against it. I suppose the family probably owns it, so they can exercise property rights to prevent necrophilia, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong with it (even violating the dead man's prior wishes).

I would say a will is merely a statement informing the inheritors of what you want to give to whom. For those respectful of your wishes, it clarifies a lot, but someone still has the right to sue if they feel they've been wrongfully excluded.

Would you say the same of dying declaration wills out of interest.
I recall an instance of a man who was caught in a piece of farming equipment managing to scrawl out ALL TO WIFE on something, (I want to say in blood, but that could just be misremembering it.) which was upheld as a valid will by the courts.
I'd interperate it as an immediate last moment gift to the wife, which is how I view a regular will, as a gift that only occurs at the last moment of life. I'd say you can't fight a wills terms when it comes down to who gets what, because it's a gift from party X to party Y, etc.

[Transhuman Proteus]

A skeleton can't consent.
Prosecute her but don't give to too hard a sentense.

Neither can sex toys, or cushions or food items or various other things people use or have used to obtain or aid in obtaining sexual pleasure. Consent is really a concern mainly with something that is alive, like a human adult, child or animal.

Such abominations do not deserve to live. Kill her, burn the bones and erase the articles.

Back to the Dark Ages with you, and no more time traveling.

[Meryuma]

Yet another loving relationship that those evil, evil conservatives will never see the beauty of.

That doesn't make any sense as a comparison. Like, at all. I'm more baffled than offended.

[Des-Bal]

I don't care about morality, I don't care about it so much that it hurts sometimes. It depends on how she came into the skeleton, I consider remains to belong to the next of kin but I'm not sure about how the law feels about it. You can't go digging up dudes it's not cool.

[GCMG]

Skeletons... dead people... consent... Well, make it legal if all immediate relatives (cousins, children, siblings and surviving ancestors) agree otherwise, sorry necrophiliacs.

[Distributist Chestertonia]

And with human replacement rates as low as they are, Europe will end up masturbating, contracepting, and aborting themselves to extinction.

And that is a BAD thing WHY exactly? Seriously this world is overburdened by the weight of massive overpopulation and the huge populations of 1st world countries and those getting there polluting it and draining it of resources like vampires. A decline in world population, especially that in the 1st world is a good thing as it frees up resources and decreases pollution.[/quote]

It's tempting to just laugh at you and be on my way.

But I'll keep it brief:

1) The UN has predicted the decline of European population based on trends dating back to at least 1995. It claims population will decline by 2050 if these trends continue.

2) Consider previous experiences of population decline - such as Rome. What happened when the then-first world declined? Everything else went down the crapper with it. When you don't have people to care for technology and knowledge, it will be lost to less developed, less educated, less civilised countries. (Unless some institution - like the Catholic Church, again - preserves it.)

(PS: Unlike the author of the last article I think it is quite possible for the same to happen to America, if it decides to "Europeanise" its culture.)

[Scandza]

Wouldn't that, hurt?

[Dilange]

How does work?

Unless its masturbation, then its not sex.....wait....what?

[Distributist Chestertonia]

On a purely natural level - ignoring Heaven, Hell, or any afterlife or reincarnation - to make this argument is on the same level as allowing bestiality, "marrying" animals, polygamy... these are victimless crimes, too, right?

Not so. Society is the victim of these crimes, including screwing corpses. Sex was made to accomplish two things: unity between husband and wife, and procreation. The functions of the chemicals and biological parts of it all make that perfectly clear. Oxytocin emotionally bonds husband and wife, while sperm and egg create new human life for the propagation of the species.

See, now you've gone off the trail. Sex can be had for enjoyment, and that is reason enough to had sex if one wants to have sex. Sex was not "made". Evolution, being a brainless process, didn't think "ok, now to map out this activity between the two genders and what it is meant for".

Evolution certainly doesn't give a stuff about man made concepts like marriage.

Except, friend, that the biology's built right into it. Yes, biologically, pleasure is definitely a component of it. We produce oxytocin when we orgasm. This is a bonding agent which emotionally and chemically united us with that which we orgasm. So there is a biological basis for pleasure.

However, we also naturally produce eggs and sperm. Procreation is, therefore, part of what the act was made for, alongside pleasure.

And how many sperm make up a new human life? One. How many eggs? One. There will never be a human made from more. The genetics are hardcoded against at. And the male gives the sperm. The female gives the egg. It is a mutual self-giving. And alongside the oxytocin dump that is given to both partners after orgasm, it is the biological basis for the nuclear family.

Necrophilia clearly accomplishes neither of these. And with human replacement rates as low as they are, Europe will end up masturbating, contracepting, and aborting themselves to extinction.

Sure they will. I didn't realize masturbation somehow stopped people having children.

Not enough to keep up the replacement rate. See my previous post for a UN article covering that, or ask for it from me. The UN expects the population of Europe to stay stable through 2030 - due to increased lifespan, not to fertility - and to fall by 2050 if trends continue as they are.

If I remember rightly masturbation still exists for adults in families with no children through to many, many children, because you know, it is irrelevant to having children.

Ah, but it does have an effect.Psychology Today has noticed that masturbation and pornography produce problems such as "Diminished libido", "anxiety", tendency to "angry overreaction", "inability to focus", and "lack of motivation". This is because it shuts down the production and signalling of a chemical called dopamine. Extended bouts of masturbation can even lead to addiction, which can take months or years to recover from.

[Equestrian Democratic Republic]

I think that she should be prosecuted for her actions. After all who wants their dead body or bones to be disturbed like that?

[Xathranaar]

I think that she should be prosecuted for her actions. After all who wants their dead body or bones to be disturbed like that?

I'd be okay with it.

I mean, it's making someone happy, and it's not like I'm using them.

[Big Jim P]

I think that she should be prosecuted for her actions. After all who wants their dead body or bones to be disturbed like that?

Me for one. Millions of geek that otherwise are not ever going to get laid for two.

[Equestrian Democratic Republic]

I think that she should be prosecuted for her actions. After all who wants their dead body or bones to be disturbed like that?

Me for one. Millions of geek that otherwise are not ever going to get laid for two.

I fear for the future of humanity now...

[Libertarian California]

Skeletons don't have dicks...


But then again, there were a wide variety of "boners" should could have used.

[SaintB]

Me for one. Millions of geek that otherwise are not ever going to get laid for two.

I fear for the future of humanity now...

Why? Because more people advocate staying out of other people's bedrooms?

[United Kingdom of Muffins]

So was this like her boyfriend or husband or did she just pick some dead guy and go at it?

[Equestrian Democratic Republic]

I fear for the future of humanity now...

Why? Because more people advocate staying out of other people's bedrooms?

No because more people seem to advocate it being okay to take human remains and use them in such a disrespectful way.

[SaintB]

So was this like her boyfriend or husband or did she just pick some dead guy and go at it?

Dead guys are pretty easy to pick up if you know where to look.

[SaintB]

Why? Because more people advocate staying out of other people's bedrooms?

No because more people seem to advocate it being okay to take human remains and use them in such a disrespectful way.

Its not like its a person any longer, its just a bunch of dead cells.

[Libertarian California]

So was this like her boyfriend or husband or did she just pick some dead guy and go at it?

What if it was her grandpa.

[Romalae]

So was this like her boyfriend or husband or did she just pick some dead guy and go at it?

What if it was her grandpa.

WOW thanks for that image.

[Big Jim P]

What if it was her grandpa.

WOW thanks for that image.

Indeed.

[Grenartia]

To be fair, that is an overexaggeration of the points that were made.

What else has been discussed? Prison is too mean?

It's 14 pages i'm not reading them all as i've said pretty much all i needed to already so go ahead and elighten me if you beleive I'm being too quick to judge.

Several people have stated that the family of the deceased would be perfectly justified to be upset and wanting to take legal action.

And Swedish prisons are nothing like American prisons. They're actually more like hotels, as I recall, because the Swedish system focuses more on rehabilitation than punishment, IIRC.

I perfectly understand you not wanting to read 14 pages.

It's about the diginity of society as a whole. It' immoral because there's nothing moral about necophilia or having sex with corpses/skeletons.

Uh...
Circular argument. on the second part.
As for the first, one persons definition of dignity is not anothers. If you don't want your corpse to have sex with people, put so in your will

Why should consent for sexual use of one's remains be legally 'opt out'? Should it not be 'opt in'?

Such abominations do not deserve to live. Kill her, burn the bones and erase the articles.

Ah. Yes. That's such a reasonable response.

[Cameroi]

is this a problem (refering to the op)? sounds derpy as hell, but why oh why is there a law? no don't answer that.