All I’ve got to say is that if I can wander around the afterlife as an anthropomorphic pile of ash then I’m all for the concept. That’d be cool!

Your pile of ash would have a specific order to it as each ash represents a specific part of your body.

That’s fine as long as I’m a walking, talking, dancing pile of ash I’d still have a lot of fun with it. Imagine how much you could freak the newbies out by just running into and around them. Muhwhahahahahahahahaha!

The movie WHAT DREAMS MAY COME starring Robin Williams (in one of his better roles) is a version of what happens in the Afterlife. 
I saw on the big screen, but it’s good as a rental.

I can tell you from personal experience that while ash certainly wanders around, it doesn’t talk and dance, but just covers everything with a grey coating and dirties up the windows.  At least that’s what it does here in my workshop, and my workshop is as close to Heaven as it gets.

Les,

Be warry of the coming of the Great Ash Bin who will collect up all the anthropomorphic ‘piles’ and vaccum them up into oblivion ... then break out into an Windex ™ commercial.

“See folks, even Heaven gets dirty with all these anthropomorphic piles of ash around… what is a good Demigod of Waste Cans to do you ask?!? Windex&trade with anthropomorphic ash cleanser that’s what”

They can kiss my ash.

Interesting questions.  I was listening to some Christian talk show here in the Detroit area the other day, and they were discussing organ donation.  The issue was, if a person dies and then God decides to resurrect that person, what happens if in the interim the person’s organs have been removed?  How are they gonna function without, say, a liver!??  It was a hoot - several people called in with varied suggestions about an appropriate “grace period.” In the end, I think they decided that 3 hours was plenty of time for the lord to decide whether to resurrect a corpse.  And the host pointed out that while resurrections do occur (they do? He referred to one in Ethiopia that’s apparently well-known to his listeners), they aren’t terribly common these days.  Good stuff.

Then there’s the whole issue of the Rapture, in which believers will be resurrected bodily and taken up to Christ in Heaven. Most who believe in this also believe that the saved will be given new and incorruptible bodies, which I suppose would include replacements for any donated organs. The same, I suppose, would go for those resurrected in the final judgment, when everyone who wasn’t already raptured will be judged according to their works. The dead are supposed to be resurrected bodily for that, too.

I don’t believe in any of this myself, but I’m trying to address the issue from the mindset of the evangelical Christian. Of course, I’m presupposing an actual knowledge of scripture. From her testimony, it doesn’t seem like this is a knowledge Sharon Rocha has.

I’m not sure it’s fair to nitpick the scriptural or logical validity of this woman’s testimony. Few people can remain clear-headed and logical under the kind of emotional stress she’s enduring. I don’t doubt that her testimony will have an impact on the jury, but that impact will probably come more from the testimony’s emotional power than its content.

I think a more interesting question is: What kind of effect will this type of emtional outburst have on the jury?

There is a special place heaven for cremains called the ash hole!
Be cremated, make an ash of yourself!

Interesting:

The issue was, if a person dies and then God decides to resurrect that person, what happens if in the interim the person’s organs have been removed?

What if at the end of the world, the trumpets wail and John Doe is resurrected, but his liver was no good and he received a transplant from Bob Smith.

Bob Smith is in hell for murdering a small family of ten ... and for other things such as touching himself.

More… John Doe, realizing that transplants saved his life, gave his corneas to science for transplant and they ended up in Mary Jones also being resurrected as she was a good person™

Does John get resurrected with no liver or eyes?
Does Mary have to give her eyes back to John? What of Bob’s Liver in Hell?

Oh the confusion

I’m sorry, Christopher, I didn’t mean to ruin your entry into a running joke, but I couldn’t help myself. The mental image alone had me giggling all the way into work.

Looks like Dad’s eyesight must be returning as he’s commenting here once again. This is good news.

Does anybody else find it extremely disturbing that there is actually a group of people out there large enough to conduct a television show devoted to the topic of resurrection in a “logical” discourse?  It sure scares me.  It also scares me that these people are thinking that they’re going to need their organs after they die, which as supposedly “charitable”, “selfless”, God-fearing people they shouldn’t even be contemplating in “this life”.

Just thought I’d point that one out, in case anybody missed it.

As far as me, I’m considering donating my body to science.  Hopefully there’ll be a use for it there (I can’t just let such a beautiful figure go COMPLETELY to waste!).  And if I DO get resurrected, I’ll get to look like a disemboweled freak!  YEAH!

Jman - I suggest you read Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadaversby Mary Roach to get a sneak preview. 

What I think is HILARIOUSLY ridiculous in following logic is the 3 days of following testimony from Scott’s friends & family.  “Uhhh, he broke up a dogfight.” YESS, that’s it!CLEARLY he wouldn’t have killed his wife & fetus!  Laci was killed (who knows how) & her husband (to date) has shown zero indignance at being accused, much less convicted.  That’s what I think’s pushing everyone.  When others appear unmoved, we try harder & harder to move them.  Unfortunately it shows how little knowledge Sharon really has of the faith & peace extended in the Bible.

Hola! Mrs. DoF!  My close friend is Menonite, one of the friendliest churches I’ve been to!

What makes no sense to me is that an entire country is riveted and breathless over the fate of a scum bag a relatively few amount of people know and thousands hold vigils for a dead woman they’d never even heard of.  Sure, it is a sad situation....but it creeps me out when I watch those newsclips of people deep in the throes of grief and despair over the death of....a total stranger.  I think that is seriously fucked up.

HEY!  What happened to my gravitar?????

“...it creeps me out when I watch those newsclips of people deep in the throes of grief and despair over the death of....a total stranger.”

I don’t know. It’s empathy, regardless of whether or not a lot of those people experienced similiar events. Without it, I think that’s when things would truly be fucked up.

The amount of coverage of this case is retarded though.

Justice:  I can understand empathy. 

However, we are talkin’ total strangers.  weeping. wailing. in the throes. of. grief. undone.

I think it’s a bit twisted.

It occured to me that the uniqueness that prompts media facination is because this is one of the 1st cases ever brought before a body was found, & convicted based on NO physical evidence & ONE piece of circumstancial evidence (fishing lisence & concrete blocks), & PURELY on Scott’s attitude.  It’s had an interesting effect when I use it in the classroom on the 20 or so times a day I see a smile & hear “you can’t prove it.”

Cindi,

However, we are talkin’ total strangers.  weeping. wailing. in the throes. of. grief. undone.

I think it’s a bit twisted.

I understand your point, though I cried pretty damn hard for total strangers when 911 went down, I was bummed when Kurt Cobain killed himself, and I still get a little choked up when radio stations do those John Lennon tributes on the anniversary of his death—when I was something like six months old. Emotional connections are pretty powerful. “In the throes of grief” though, I see what you are saying.

Ellie,

the uniqueness that prompts media facination is because this is one of the 1st cases ever brought before a body was found, & convicted based on NO physical evidence & ONE piece of circumstancial evidence…

Are you guessing? As a person who has studied Criminal Justice, I highly doubt that. There are a number of convictions on record when no body was ever found. And believe it or not, there are an even bigger number of convictions on record when circumstantial evidence was the only evidence ever offered.

The sensation in this case is it’s resemblance to daytime drama television, and it started when the woman went missing.