US 3 people dead, over 280 injured from explosions at the finish line of the Boston Marathon

The twelve Muslim cemetaries contacted by the funeral home director refused to have him buried at their locations. The refusals most likely were fueled by hesitation to make your cemetary into a media circus/target for protests, plus no one was willing to pay; it would have to be donated.

Too bad they couldn't use some of the estimated $150,000 already spent by US taxpayers to house, feed, and educate these two murderers. There is no reason on earth they couldn't have flown the body to his home country, which he visited recently for six months. He was not a US citizen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom L.
Why did a Christian woman spearhead an effort to bury his body?

I'm not sure whose example she's following. I'm pretty sure Jesus would never have done this. I thought that Jesus was only interested in people speaking out against gay marriage and calling for the end of big government programs like WIC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amy SF
I thought that was awful, refusing to allow him to be buried. All it did was make it that much harder on the Uncle who stepped up to take the body, and was already having to deal with what his nephews did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muggle
Spang said:
Then what is the point?
Click to expand...

Well for starters, he hated America. If he had a choice in the matter, I doubt he would have wanted to be buried here.
Second using a burial plot for him means there's one less plot for someone else.
Also the decision not to bury him in MA, is taking the feelings of the victims families into consideration.
Per LB, he received $150k in assistance from the gov't, and took 3 lives. Now his family wants our soil to bury him? I think we've given him enough already.

There are people in this world who need the caring and compassion of others. Dead or alive, he doesn't deserve it.
 
Spang said:
I think it has less to do with being caring and compassionate, and more to do with not being a savage.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is savage for cemeteries to refuse a burial if they think it will damage their business and maybe insult families. Lots of cemeteries used to refuse to bury suicide victims, for example. I don't think that is still common.

From USA Today:
" Martha Mullen, of Richmond, told The Associated Press that she offered to help after seeing news reports about towns and cemeteries refusing to allow burial. She said she is not the only person who helped with arrangements. "It was an interfaith effort," she said. "Basically because Jesus says love your enemies.

"Imam Ammar Amonette of the Islamic Center of Virginia said that his group was never consulted and that Mullen reached out to a separate group, the Islamic Society of Greater Richmond.

"The whole Muslim community here is furious. Frankly, we are furious that we were never given any information. It was all done secretly behind our backs," Amonette said, adding it "makes no sense whatsoever" that Tsarnaev's body was buried in Virginia."Now everybody who's buried in that cemetery, their loved ones are going to have to go to that place," he said."
http://m.usatoday.com/article/news/2150167
 
mlp said:
IMO, this desire to deny a burial spot to certain of the dead or to even desecrate their bodies is one of the nastiest, small minded aspects of human nature.

This whole uproar against having him buried in the various localities that were considered is ridiculous. I guess we haven't progressed from the days when convicted felons' bodies were hung at the crossroads to rot, political enemies were displayed on city walls, and still others were cut into pieces and sent to the four corners of the kingdom.
Click to expand...
For me, I just don't see the point of spending any money or other resources "respectfully burying" the body of a psychopath. If neither his native country nor his co-religionists won't step up to the plate, then it's not our responsibility.
 
Tom said:
For me, I just don't see the point of spending any money or other resources "respectfully burying" the body of a psychopath. If neither his native country nor his co-religionists won't step up to the plate, then it's not our responsibility.
Click to expand...

The uncle paid for the transportation and burial of the body. http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...run-high-after-boston-bombing-suspects-burial

And if no relative had stepped up and paid for it, we should do what we do in the case of any person, including convicted mass murderers - we bury their bodies, we don't put them out on the street to be eaten by dogs, or whatever else so many people seem to feel is appropriate.

I don't remember this sort of controversy in the case of Timothey McVeigh or Ted Bundy or any other of the scores of multiple homicide murderers in this country. In all of those cases, we seemed to be able to act like semi civilized beings when it came to the disposal of the bodies.

I wonder whether anyone on here can come up with an explanation of why this case is so different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yally and Spang
mlp said:
we don't put them out on the street to be eaten by dogs, or whatever else so many people seem to feel is appropriate.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you're getting this. I've been following the story, and listening to people IRL in MA, and no one has suggested letting the body out to be eaten by dogs, or displayed, or rot, or anything like that. Just a lot of hyperbole.
 
beancounter said:
I don't know where you're getting this. I've been following the story, and listening to people IRL in MA, and no one has suggested letting the body out to be eaten by dogs, or displayed, or rot, or anything like that. Just a lot of hyperbole.
Click to expand...

I'm getting it from the comments to the articles. The most common theme is actually to cover the body in pigs' blood, or to feed it to the pigs. Because he was Muslim.

You're objecting to the body being buried here, so maybe you should come up with an alternative that doesn't make us all look like we came directly from the Middle Ages.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blobbenstein
mlp said:
The uncle paid for the transportation and burial of the body. http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...run-high-after-boston-bombing-suspects-burial

And if no relative had stepped up and paid for it, we should do what we do in the case of any person, including convicted mass murderers - we bury their bodies, we don't put them out on the street to be eaten by dogs, or whatever else so many people seem to feel is appropriate.

I don't remember this sort of controversy in the case of Timothey McVeigh or Ted Bundy or any other of the scores of multiple homicide murderers in this country. In all of those cases, we seemed to be able to act like semi civilized beings when it came to the disposal of the bodies.

I wonder whether anyone on here can come up with an explanation of why this case is so different.
Click to expand...


"After Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh was executed in 2001, his body was cremated and his ashes were given to his lawyer, who scattered them at an undisclosed location. A few years earlier, Congress passed a law to ensure that McVeigh, a veteran who earned a Bronze Star in the Persian Gulf War, couldn’t be buried in Arlington National Cemetery." http://ideas.time.com/2013/05/07/un...d-assassins-are-buried/slide/timothy-mcveigh/
 
Yea
ledboots said:
"After Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh was executed in 2001, his body was cremated and his ashes were given to his lawyer, who scattered them at an undisclosed location. A few years earlier, Congress passed a law to ensure that McVeigh, a veteran who earned a Bronze Star in the Persian Gulf War, couldn’t be buried in Arlington National Cemetery." http://ideas.time.com/2013/05/07/un...d-assassins-are-buried/slide/timothy-mcveigh/
Click to expand...

Yes, that was McCain. Couple of differences - military cemetaries, if I remember correctly, are required to accept burial of any veteran who served honorably. McCain's bill carved out an exception to that.

Secondly, McVeigh himself chose cremation. At first, he wanted his ashes to be scattered on the site of the bombing, but he changed his mind about that.

Thirdly, there wasn't this public outcry.

In fact, let's take a quite recent example: the mass shooting at Sandy Hook. Where was the public outcry about the burial of that killer? Where is the thread on VV where people were upset about his burial? Is the killing of all those small children less heinous?
 
  • Like
Reactions: thefadedone
mlp said:
I'm getting it from the comments to the articles. The most common theme is actually to cover the body in pigs' blood, or to feed it to the pigs. Because he was Muslim.

You're objecting to the body being buried here, so maybe you should come up with an alternative that doesn't make us all look like we came directly from the Middle Ages.
Click to expand...

The comments under articles tend to be from the most extreme people. They don't represent the majority.

The best solution is burying the body out of state. Just because VA "isn't far enough" doesn't mean I want to do anything medieval to the body.
 
mlp said:
Yea


Yes, that was McCain. Couple of differences - military cemetaries, if I remember correctly, are required to accept burial of any veteran who served honorably. McCain's bill carved out an exception to that.

Secondly, McVeigh himself chose cremation. At first, he wanted his ashes to be scattered on the site of the bombing, but he changed his mind about that.

Thirdly, there wasn't this public outcry.

In fact, let's take a quite recent example: the mass shooting at Sandy Hook. Where was the public outcry about the burial of that killer? Where is the thread on VV where people were upset about his burial? Is the killing of all those small children less heinous?
Click to expand...

You asked about McVeigh. I'm not going to look up and debate every whackjob murderer's burial details.
 
Top Bottom