If there's no provable living relatives, it should belong to the state and curated by archeologists and historians. If there are living relatives, the decicion should be up to them. And I'm talking direct decendents up to a reasonable number of generations.
where do you draw the line
When there's no archeological, scientific or culturar benefit of doing so or goes against national ethos.
be okay to open the vault of old George Washington and put his remains in a glass box for everyone to see?
I don't see how that would fall in my categories, but I would say it's reasonable to open his grave to examine his biters as his dentures have been a matter of historical conflict. But it would break social taboos due to his position and thus be against nationalistic will.
[–] Uncle420 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
If there's no provable living relatives, it should belong to the state and curated by archeologists and historians. If there are living relatives, the decicion should be up to them. And I'm talking direct decendents up to a reasonable number of generations.
When there's no archeological, scientific or culturar benefit of doing so or goes against national ethos.
I don't see how that would fall in my categories, but I would say it's reasonable to open his grave to examine his biters as his dentures have been a matter of historical conflict. But it would break social taboos due to his position and thus be against nationalistic will.