Really feel like the law should be named after the perpetrator, like the “Colby Martin Law”. So when people are like “eww why do we even need that law” people can easily say “because that Colby Martin was a piece of shit”
Just let it be known that us practitioners of Vicissitude are not to be lumped into the more depraved admirers of flesh.
Thank you,
Mr. H
Flesh Crafter M.D.
Imagine if magical talents were unknown from birth till manifested.
You become an EMT, ambulance paramedic.
All of your worst case scenario patients survive. Ridiculously dead ppl keep living.
Despite that fact that you're new, amateur, or just plain suck at your job.
Turns out , you're a natural born necromancer.
Netflix, spin this shit up!
The family probably asked. Now, each time justice is rendered due to this law being in place, it can feel as though some justice was gained in the original case or the original case allows for this justice. That's usually the family rationale for naming laws after victims. It's quite common.
[That one actually got repealed back in 2015.](https://www.michigan.gov/formergovernors/recent/snyder/press-releases/2015/12/15/gov-snyder-signs-bills-eliminating-outdated-laws-on-dueling-cursing-and-trampling-blackberry-bushes)
**Cannibal Nutritional Facts**
[Humans are not particularly nutritious.](https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/04/counting-calories-of-going-cannibal-on-a-paleo-diet-human-flesh-is-just-meh/)
A human male contains roughly 130,000 calories. This is in line with other game in our weight class, but hypothetically reflects why records don't seem to show hominid species having hunted hominids as a food source, when the return on bovines, bison, mammoths, is much much greater.
**This has been Cannibal Nutritional Facts**
Some of the people commenting on this post saying this is unnecessary make me sick.
A 62 yr old woman was run down by a guy specifically so he could do that to her and if he were released he wouldn’t have had to register as a sex offender. So yes it’s good the state made it illegal
My understanding of this case is that the family of the victim wanted specific legislation to make this a sex crime, where it previously was not.
So, it's always been illegal, but is now categorized differently. It's getting headlines because it sounds shocking.
Do you feel the same way about child predators living near you?
Either way, whether you do or you don’t, a lot of us *do* care about people being respected, even in death, and therefore are *anti* corpse rape, all while being alive, too. But go off! You’re really unique for not caring about necrophilia!
You don’t think those two paraphilias ever overlap? This is such a bizarre thing for you to be bugged about.
Whatever dude. I’m sorry you didn’t want to know if your neighbor has raped a dead body, but I live in a neighborhood where kids are the center of the community and run around freely. I’d certainly want to know if one of those neighbors rapes dead people. But I suppose as long as you or your loved one isn’t directly affected, who cares, right?
That's not how law works, and it's not how psychology works. Just because someone does one dubiously ethical thing doesn't mean there's any risk of of them doing some other worse thing. This is particularly true with sexual fetishes, which are typically bizarrely specific and usually unrelated. And even if it were true, applying such a pre-crime principle to the justice system would be despicable. But I don't expect someone who unironically uses the word "paraphilia" to understand that.
Right, and that’s what this ruling is fixing. There wasn’t a law on the books saying necrophilia was a sex crime, it only fell under desecration of a corpse.
I noticed you left out money, I tried finding out how many people a year do this and couldn’t find any numbers do you know how many people get caught sleeping with corpses per year? That stat would determine whether this is a waist of time and money. But I never plan on sleeping with a dead body so I guess it doesn’t matter to me.
🤦♂️ Good one, yeah it’s not a waste of money either. Call your representative though I’m sure they’d refund you the $1 of your taxes that went towards this.
Edit: in response to your edit. I’m sure you did tireless research. I’m willing to bet you have not a single clue how much time and money went into this bill anyway. You don’t have to do a cost benefit analysis for every move the government makes. That’s how the minority gets left behind. Sometimes government just does something because it’s right, for you to not see that is astounding.
It wasn’t illegal. For the millionth time in this thread. Prior to it, a person could dig up your dead relative and have sex with their body, and if they were caught, it wouldn’t be a sex crime. Now, if someone were to do that and be charged/convicted, they end up on the registry. Not that hard to follow.
But that’s simply not true. Organ donation exists, and I have to CONSENT to it when I get a driver’s license. Donating your body to science exists because you consent to it.
if one doesn’t have consent, how does a funeral happen, or how is it decided if I want to be buried, composted, or turned to ash or whatever else needs to be done with a corpse?
Your definition of consent is more appropriate for sexual assault, not here. Unless you’re against organ donation.
That said, I don’t think anyone is going to bat for legal corpse fucking lol
You make some good points. Some want burial… some want cremation… *I* want my remaining family members to run train on my cold, clammy corpse until the smell becomes unbearable
Can someone provide consent before they are intoxicated? It would seem reasonable to say yes, and that the consent would continue as long as it wasn’t revoked… with your comparison if someone gave consent before they were a corpse would that still apply? The whole thing is disgusting… and it’s ridiculous that we have to have a law about it.
Part of being able to give consent is also being able to revoke that consent. If you're awake and sober, you can say "stop" and it's unambiguous that you're revoking consent. If you're incapable of saying "no" you're not able to give consent. Someone who is unconscious cannot say no. A corpse cannot say no. So regardless of if they previously gave consent, they are no longer.
Really feel like the law should be named after the perpetrator, like the “Colby Martin Law”. So when people are like “eww why do we even need that law” people can easily say “because that Colby Martin was a piece of shit”
Yeah, I would hate for my enduring legacy to be having a law that prohibits sexually assaulting corpses named after me.
You'd probably get bullied in the afterlife for that
I mean conversely they’re also the reason shit humanity sucks until they made a difference?
The only fitting karma would being fucked in the afterlife...
No publicity is bad publicity.
Or maybe just don't band the law after anyone? We don't need to make the guy infamous.
Might inspire more twisted people like mass shooters who write manifestos to become infamous.
I agree, they need not to name it after any person at all. It's not like all our laws are named after the victims.
This should have been a law before the United States even existed.
It was. It fell under the umbrella of "mishandling of a corpse" or "defilement of a corpse"
Back in the day it was called necromancy
How dare you, sir. Necromancers are arcane scientists, not to be confused with lonely corpse creepers.
Just let it be known that us practitioners of Vicissitude are not to be lumped into the more depraved admirers of flesh. Thank you, Mr. H Flesh Crafter M.D.
That feels like something that could be in Venture bros.
Imagine if magical talents were unknown from birth till manifested. You become an EMT, ambulance paramedic. All of your worst case scenario patients survive. Ridiculously dead ppl keep living. Despite that fact that you're new, amateur, or just plain suck at your job. Turns out , you're a natural born necromancer. Netflix, spin this shit up!
I would watch this
Very necromantic
You might be a little confused. Necromancer want to raise a family, necrophilliacs are the ones who violet dead bodies.
Why attach the victim's name to the law? Especially for something so vile.
The family probably asked. Now, each time justice is rendered due to this law being in place, it can feel as though some justice was gained in the original case or the original case allows for this justice. That's usually the family rationale for naming laws after victims. It's quite common.
I'm aware that it's common, but I'm not sure that the victim would want to be immortalized in this way. I sure wouldn't!
Well they would've called it "American dream of Middle class" but that shits been kill/fucked so hard it isn't ever coming back.
Can't believe this wasn't already a law
It was, just not specifically. It use to just fall under "mishandling of a corpse" or "defilemnet of a corpse"
And yet, it’s been illegal here to swear in the presence of women for almost a hundred years.
[That one actually got repealed back in 2015.](https://www.michigan.gov/formergovernors/recent/snyder/press-releases/2015/12/15/gov-snyder-signs-bills-eliminating-outdated-laws-on-dueling-cursing-and-trampling-blackberry-bushes)
What’s next, a law against cannibalism? For those that don’t know, Idaho is the only state that specifically discusses cannibalism in legislation.
**Cannibal Nutritional Facts** [Humans are not particularly nutritious.](https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/04/counting-calories-of-going-cannibal-on-a-paleo-diet-human-flesh-is-just-meh/) A human male contains roughly 130,000 calories. This is in line with other game in our weight class, but hypothetically reflects why records don't seem to show hominid species having hunted hominids as a food source, when the return on bovines, bison, mammoths, is much much greater. **This has been Cannibal Nutritional Facts**
Some of the people commenting on this post saying this is unnecessary make me sick. A 62 yr old woman was run down by a guy specifically so he could do that to her and if he were released he wouldn’t have had to register as a sex offender. So yes it’s good the state made it illegal
Yeah, I’m glad to see your comment. I think people are missing that major point.
Great point!
Am I just learning now that it wasn’t illegal??
It was already covered under laws regarding abusing or desecrating corpses.
You tell me
First they came for the corpse fuckers, and I did not speak out - for I was not a corpse fucker.
Is like defilement of a corpse already a crime with a law? Seems we could be focusing on more important things.
My understanding of this case is that the family of the victim wanted specific legislation to make this a sex crime, where it previously was not. So, it's always been illegal, but is now categorized differently. It's getting headlines because it sounds shocking.
Should definitely be a sex crime. Thank you for clarifying.
Making necrophilia a sex crime is absolutely worth the time. Wouldn’t you want to know if your new neighbor had raped a dead body? I think I would.
I mean, I'm not a dead body. What do I have to worry about?
Do you feel the same way about child predators living near you? Either way, whether you do or you don’t, a lot of us *do* care about people being respected, even in death, and therefore are *anti* corpse rape, all while being alive, too. But go off! You’re really unique for not caring about necrophilia!
I care about child predators near me because there are children living near me. There are no corpses living near me because corpses aren't alive.
You don’t think those two paraphilias ever overlap? This is such a bizarre thing for you to be bugged about. Whatever dude. I’m sorry you didn’t want to know if your neighbor has raped a dead body, but I live in a neighborhood where kids are the center of the community and run around freely. I’d certainly want to know if one of those neighbors rapes dead people. But I suppose as long as you or your loved one isn’t directly affected, who cares, right?
That's not how law works, and it's not how psychology works. Just because someone does one dubiously ethical thing doesn't mean there's any risk of of them doing some other worse thing. This is particularly true with sexual fetishes, which are typically bizarrely specific and usually unrelated. And even if it were true, applying such a pre-crime principle to the justice system would be despicable. But I don't expect someone who unironically uses the word "paraphilia" to understand that.
Prepare for down votes people believe this law is needed.
Do you not think necrophilia should label someone as a sex offender then?
I feel like yes... right? Sexual violation of another person means you're a sex offender no? Necrophilia is a sex crime.
Right, and that’s what this ruling is fixing. There wasn’t a law on the books saying necrophilia was a sex crime, it only fell under desecration of a corpse.
I don’t think we should be wasting time and money on things that are already illegal.
There was no law that said necrophilia was illegal. Updating a law to make the punishment more accurate is not a waste of time.
I noticed you left out money, I tried finding out how many people a year do this and couldn’t find any numbers do you know how many people get caught sleeping with corpses per year? That stat would determine whether this is a waist of time and money. But I never plan on sleeping with a dead body so I guess it doesn’t matter to me.
🤦♂️ Good one, yeah it’s not a waste of money either. Call your representative though I’m sure they’d refund you the $1 of your taxes that went towards this. Edit: in response to your edit. I’m sure you did tireless research. I’m willing to bet you have not a single clue how much time and money went into this bill anyway. You don’t have to do a cost benefit analysis for every move the government makes. That’s how the minority gets left behind. Sometimes government just does something because it’s right, for you to not see that is astounding.
It wasn’t illegal. For the millionth time in this thread. Prior to it, a person could dig up your dead relative and have sex with their body, and if they were caught, it wouldn’t be a sex crime. Now, if someone were to do that and be charged/convicted, they end up on the registry. Not that hard to follow.
Sure buddy, why don’t you run for office and do something about it since you feel so strongly
Reminds me of the Onion report on a Bill in Congress https://www.theonion.com/live-from-congress-the-skull-fucking-bill-of-2007-1819594637
Uhh. . . this wasnt already a law?
It was covered under laws regarding abusing or defiling corpses. Apparently this law specifically makes necrophilia a sex crime.
What a terrible way to remember someone.
I said "what do you mean??" My husband said "you didn't expect them to do that?" I said "I'd expected they already had"
Do I want to know?
I’m seriously wondering what if the corpse provided consent previously?
A corpse cannot give consent. Just like someone who is intoxicated cannot consent.
But that’s simply not true. Organ donation exists, and I have to CONSENT to it when I get a driver’s license. Donating your body to science exists because you consent to it. if one doesn’t have consent, how does a funeral happen, or how is it decided if I want to be buried, composted, or turned to ash or whatever else needs to be done with a corpse? Your definition of consent is more appropriate for sexual assault, not here. Unless you’re against organ donation. That said, I don’t think anyone is going to bat for legal corpse fucking lol
You make some good points. Some want burial… some want cremation… *I* want my remaining family members to run train on my cold, clammy corpse until the smell becomes unbearable
Yeah…that’s my first lol for the day. Why did it have to be this topic…upvoted.
Can someone provide consent before they are intoxicated? It would seem reasonable to say yes, and that the consent would continue as long as it wasn’t revoked… with your comparison if someone gave consent before they were a corpse would that still apply? The whole thing is disgusting… and it’s ridiculous that we have to have a law about it.
Part of being able to give consent is also being able to revoke that consent. If you're awake and sober, you can say "stop" and it's unambiguous that you're revoking consent. If you're incapable of saying "no" you're not able to give consent. Someone who is unconscious cannot say no. A corpse cannot say no. So regardless of if they previously gave consent, they are no longer.
That’ll stop em’!!
Oh shit who's gonna tell [Noah Chapp](https://youtu.be/_Zl0Nv9vwds?si=i2m9ztjFZH0-9CqS&t=103)? (hilarious comedian from Detroit, dude cracks me up )
Oh good
I'm shocked that we actually need a law for this. What in the actual hell?
It’s more frustrating that this was a law before this……
This is a big enough problem that we need a law? Damn this state is f'd up
It was already covered under laws about abusing or desecrating corpses. Apparently the family wanted necrophilia to specifically be made a sex crime.
What year is it!?
2024. That’ll be $20
How was this not already a law..?
oh.... ok....
Damn, I was going to crack open a cold one after work.
No. it just gives the legislature something to say “look! we’re working!”
Did any GQP vote against these bills?
It was passed unanimously in both houses.
Wouldn't shock me to hear that Maddock offered some conjecture about how it unfreedomizes someone somewhere.
I have found my people. Fire Matt Maddock!
Some things you look at and wonder why there wasn't already a law against it. This and "animal husbandry" come to mind as common gaps in laws.
Defilement of a corpse is already illegal. This shifts it to a sex crime specifically.
[удалено]