Interesting legal tid-bit

[james_davis_nicoll]

The government also argued a person’s charter rights end upon death.

Comments

[viktor-haag.livejournal.com]

What do they mean by "death"? If we have people arguing that "life" begins at conception, then shouldn't these same people argue that people "never die" because "the soul lives on"?

[icedrake.livejournal.com]

I thought there was a limited number of souls available, though. So clearly at some point, a body and soul must part to enable the recycling program to keep going.

[doc-lemming.livejournal.com]

No, I think that's a Spider Robinson idea.

In classical Christianity, as I understand it, the soul is the little ineffable part of Godstuff we get when we mix our boy parts and our girl parts. Since God is limitless and omnipresent, there are as many souls as necessary for the purpose.

Now, God might be angry because we keep taking some of His (Its?) stuff for our children, but the PR spin isn't that way at all; they've managed to cover up for the whole "destroying cities" thing. (I presume that was back during His/Her/Its drinking days.)

[icedrake.livejournal.com]

"No, I think that's a Spider Robinson idea."

Actually, it's worse -- I think I've tracked down the origin of that idea in my head. It's a really, *really* embarrassing one. Though the notion of souls as parts of the body of god does originate in Jewish mythology, I can't recall right now if the concept of a finite amount of souls shows up there as well or makes a first appearance in the film.

[doc-lemming.livejournal.com]

Robinson wrote a story on the idea that the number of human souls are finite, which was probably in Melancholy Elephants (I'm not sure if I own it any more, and I'm not where I can check). That may predate the movie, though they might be independent inventions and the movie just got shopped around for longer.

Of course, neither of them predate Jewish mythology.

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

On Babylon 5, the Minbari became convinced that they might run out of soul-stuff because Minbari souls were being incarnated in humans, on the basis of their examination of Jeffrey Sinclair.

That turned out not to be the correct explanation.

[(Anonymous)]

Melancholy Elephants, yes.

Arthur C Clarke used that idea in a short story, too. I forget the title, but it ended with one of the scientists (or doctors) who figured out what was going on walking out into a glacier to die, to recycle his soul.

[ethelmay.livejournal.com]

It's been spontaneously reinvented a number of times. My mother used it in an (unpublished) short story as well. I'm just as glad she never figured out how unoriginal it was. The story itself was not badly written as I recall.

[jsburbidge.livejournal.com]

In orthodox theology, the soul is not Godstuff, although a new one is created for each living human.

It's neoplatonic/gnostic approaches which define the soul as Godstuff (which is easier in those contexts because the definition of "god" is blurry because of theories of emanations).

[doc-lemming.livejournal.com]

Ah, thank you. So the supply is probably unlimited (though from a medieval standpoint, so was clean air).

I spent more time on heresies, which sounded more fun to me.

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

I thought the old Christian orthodoxy had no truck with souls going out of bodies and departing for Heaven: the soul is as inextricably connected to the body as any materialist would have it. Upon death, both sleep in the ground until the time of resurrection, when the body is miraculously restored and comes back to life.

[jsburbidge.livejournal.com]

Correct: see N.T. Wright for a strongly-argued form of the argument.

The interim state is a popular belief which has never been officially affirmed as such by the Church (but IIRC was nearly officially condemned by one mediaeval pope, whose name escapes me at the moment). It is, however, implied by beliefs regarding purgatory and the intercession of saints, and can probably be considered part of the current residue of faith in both east and west. The only related thing in the creeds is the resurrection of the body.

The scholastics held that souls in heaven do not exist on their own but have interim spiritual bodies created for them, which will cease to be used at the time of the general resurrection. This allows the retention of the position that a soul cannot exist apart from a body.

[beamjockey.livejournal.com]

The scholastics held that souls in heaven do not exist on their own but have interim spiritual bodies created for them, which will cease to be used at the time of the general resurrection.

This is reminiscent of the rickety arrangement in Gary K. Wolf's novel Who Censored Roger Rabbit?, whereby 'toons can generate temporary doppelgangers to be employed in scenes where they are hit on the head by giant mallets, crushed by falling anvils, etc. (Their speeches are also emitted in literal word balloons.)

The film version replaced this junk with better worldbuilding.

Another theological link: Wolf went on to co-author a space opera with an archbishop. Andrew Greeley is gone now, but we still have Space Vulture.

[viktor-haag.livejournal.com]

This makes no sense, because once you get to heaven (or that/those other place(s)), you're there for "all eternity". And, arguably, once you get to heaven (or that/those other place(s)), there's more of "you" there (in the sense that you have to be "consciously and reasoningly" participating in your new environment else what's the point) than at the point of conception that it makes way more sense for the right-to-life people to argue for post-death rights than foetus rights.

Unless they're going to argue that "life" is only the biological, meat part of the process, and not at all the soul part of the process.

Which makes the right-to-life people's traditional backgrounds and positions even more curious.

[dsrtao]

Ah, but once you've emigrated to Heaven, you no longer need your citizenship and those rights are terminated.

Presto: it must be legal to kill non-citizens.

NOT a lawyer, just speculating

[dewline.livejournal.com]

"Convenience of the Crown" in play here?

[nathan helfinstine (from livejournal.com)]

"The officer in question was later found guilty of disgraceful conduct and docked a day's pay."

That'll certainly teach him!


I would note, though, that America is just as bad. "Warren v. District of Columbia" established that the police have no legally-enforceable duty to protect people or prevent crimes.

[sesmo.livejournal.com]

This is because the court tried to imagine what would happen if you could sue the cops every time there was a crime. Good times.

[ilya187.livejournal.com]

Yes. In this case, I definitely agree with the court.

I know of a case where someone drowned at a beach, and the victim's family sued a scuba instructor who was conducting a class on that beach, on the grounds that he was trained in water rescue and it was "his duty" to save the drowning person. Never mind that during the drowning the instructor was under water, had no way to see or hear the victim, and his first professional duty was to his students.

[nathan helfinstine (from livejournal.com)]

We can sue doctors and lawyers and accountants for professional malpractice. Why not police? The cited lawsuit wasn't about a mysterious unsolved crime, it was several specific police officers failing to make even minimal attempts to investigate a crime in progress. (In fairness, they did drive by, but apparently failed to hear the screams of the victims, unlike the neighbors that were continuing to call police.)

[sesmo.livejournal.com]

You can sue the doctors and lawyers with whom you have a specific professional relationship. Police officers do not have such a relationship with the people living in their area.

This is not to imply that I believe those police officers shouldn't be punished for their actions, just that giving a private cause of action to every victim of violence sounds like a bad plan.

[jsburbidge.livejournal.com]

Yep.

In common-law jurisdictions suits may lie for malfeasance but not for nonfeasance. In fact, except in jurisdictions with so-called "good samaritan" legislation, it's safer to stand by and do nothing rather than try to help someone bleeding on the sidewalk if you're a medical professional, because as soon as you stop to help you tale on a duty of care.

[kgbooklog.livejournal.com]

Was anyone actually claiming her rights were violated after her death? And will anyone try to apply this to other rights, like copyright?

[sesmo.livejournal.com]

People claimed that her rights had been violated, which caused her death. The counter argument was that you cannot assert a right violation posthumously.