25th February 2009, 04:43 PM
Onlooker does make some very good points.
If (about) 95% of people who post on BAJR are against reburial lets try putting the debate in a wider context: archaeologists as a group are very much a minority grouping in this country due to the small numbers of people engaged in this science, compare that number to how many people hold some form of religious belief and it is still vastly outnumbered. And yet the arguement is used that the wishes of the minority in the name of science should take precedence, why? have archaeologists been appointed the custodians of everyones ancestral remains? or is it a case, that archaeology is the science that deals with said remains and therefore have taken responsibility for them? but does that still give us the right to retain them indefinately?
If (about) 95% of people who post on BAJR are against reburial lets try putting the debate in a wider context: archaeologists as a group are very much a minority grouping in this country due to the small numbers of people engaged in this science, compare that number to how many people hold some form of religious belief and it is still vastly outnumbered. And yet the arguement is used that the wishes of the minority in the name of science should take precedence, why? have archaeologists been appointed the custodians of everyones ancestral remains? or is it a case, that archaeology is the science that deals with said remains and therefore have taken responsibility for them? but does that still give us the right to retain them indefinately?