2 ms·
I don't think it'd be a particularly popular decision to use tax dollars to pay for a murderer to have a funeral celebration and burial. Maybe that's callous bu
by jakejake 11y ago
I don't think it'd be a particularly popular decision to use tax dollars to pay for a murderer to have a funeral celebration and burial. Maybe that's callous but I'd guess that's the way it is in the US.
As far as I know it's up to relatives or loved ones to bury their deceased and its up to them to arrange a funeral, plot of land, headstone, etc which runs in the thousands of dollars. If there is no one willing or able to pay then I'd assume the state essentially disposes of the body by cremation.
- Vespasian 11y agoYeah I can see that. I was just surprised that you are allowed to keep the urn at home. In my country if you no one is willing or able to pay for the burial of the ashes or the body the state pays but can get back the money from heirs and relatives. You are not allowed to not bury the ashes.
- ISL 11y agoI don't know the cultural origin of the tradition, but some people keep the ashes of their relatives in their homes. I have friends who have an urn with a parent's ashes in a place of honor. Ashes pose no public health risk (they're often scattered in public places, parks, and bodies of water), so it's surprising to learn that any government would require that ashes be interred below ground.