Have you thought what it means to re-use a grave?

[nxjen]

Explain the violation of trust and the promise that has been broken. As has already been pointed out, burial plots have not been sold in perpetuity but only for a fixed term. Pure spin that doesn't stand up to investigation.

[Sue]

edborders Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The Undertakers is who - they told the

> "stakeholders" group that there was no demand for

> burial with flat headstones and for using other

> people's headstones.

>

Well no, undertakers sell new headstones, don't they. It's hardly in their interests to mention to people that old ones could be used, and people aren't likely to think of that option for themselves, are they?

I don't suppose for a minute that any unbiased person has researched this by putting the options to a reasonably large representative group of people in a way devoid of emotional language.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Loz]

edborders Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There needs to be a discussion about burial policy and cemetery management but every time we try to

> post here we get abuse from people who don't know jack about it and don't even know they don't know jack.

That's because everyone suspects you are only interested in the subject in order to try and stop a few trees being removed. If you stop intertwining the subjects, you may have more luck.

[Sue]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> edborders Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > There needs to be a discussion about burial

> policy and cemetery management but every time we

> try to

> > post here we get abuse from people who don't

> know jack about it and don't even know they don't

> know jack.

>

> That's because everyone suspects you are only

> interested in the subject in order to try and stop

> a few trees being removed. If you stop

> intertwining the subjects, you may have more luck.

It's also because, unfortunately, you lost credibility quite early on by using unnecessarily emotive language, giving misinformation, inventing names for things and places, and starting multiple threads all over the forum on basically the same subject.

And also by telling others that they know nothing about the issues involved when quite clearly some of them do.

[henryb]

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Explain the violation of trust and the promise

> that has been broken. As has already been pointed

> out, burial plots have not been sold in perpetuity

> but only for a fixed term. Pure spin that doesn't

> stand up to investigation.

That is not true. When the plots now reaching the 75 year mark were being sold it was in perpetuity. Re-use was illegal until recently. The Victorians found it so abhorrent they banned it. The fixed terms came in 1977 I think. The power revoke in perpetuity rights only came recently. Hence the sudden interest in re-use across the country. Southwark is the only London borough to try it a large scale though.

[henryb]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> edborders Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > There needs to be a discussion about burial

> policy and cemetery management but every time we

> try to

> > post here we get abuse from people who don't

> know jack about it and don't even know they don't

> know jack.

>

> That's because everyone suspects you are only

> interested in the subject in order to try and stop

> a few trees being removed. If you stop

> intertwining the subjects, you may have more luck.

Trust me Lewis very much loves the old graves as well as the trees.

[edborders]

The regular Save Southwark Woods meeting is Tuesday, January 12th, 2016

We are fighting to save the trees, graves and heritge of Camberwell Old and New Cemeteries. No to excavation of graves and removal of headstones.

Tuesday at 7:30pm

The Herne

2 Forest Hill Road, London

SE22 0RR

http://www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

[edhistory]

henryb Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That is not true. When the plots now reaching the

> 75 year mark were being sold it was in perpetuity.

> Re-use was illegal until recently. The Victorians

> found it so abhorrent they banned it. The fixed

> terms came in 1977 I think. The power revoke in

> perpetuity rights only came recently.

Is there evidence for this, or is it another "Nunhead fact"?

John K

[mynamehere]

John K do some research as you're interested in local history

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2013/06/recycled-graves-coming-soon-to-a-cemetery-near-you/

History is a slippy thing

Don't stop at the first thing you find. Cross check and watch your sources of course

[edborders]

it is a fact in Nunhead and thrughout London

Graves of local people are going to be dug up.

Section 74 Local London Authorities Act of 2007

74 Power to disturb human remains

(1)Where a burial authority has extinguished?

(a)a right of burial in a grave space under section 6 (power to extinguish rights of burial in cemetery lands) of the Act of 1969; or

(b)a right of interment in respect of a grave under section 9 of the Act of 1976,

the burial authority may disturb or authorise the disturbance of human remains interred in the grave for the purpose of increasing the space for interments in the grave.

(2)No human remains may be disturbed under this section if they have been interred for a period of less than 75 years.

(3)Any human remains disturbed under subsection (1) above must be reintered in the grave.

>>>END

Additionl Reading.

Section 9 of the Greater London (General Powers) Act 1976

file:///C:/Users/Carnegie/Downloads/Re_Use_Technical_Guidance_Document____Final_October_2013.pdf

"Technical Guidance on the Re-Use and Reclamation of Graves in London Local Authority Cemeteries"

Lewis Schaffer

Nunhead Fact Checker, tree and old grave lover

[HopOne]

I seem to recall Des Waters saying that this did not apply to Southwark. Now they could get this applied and lobbying Lords to do so would seem to me to be a better use of resources than planning to dig more graves ad infinitum.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjmuNaO5qHKAhUK1xQKHVJNCBEQFgg0MAM&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.southwark.gov.uk%2Fdownload%2Fdownloads%2Fid%2F11857%2Flednet_report&usg=AFQjCNFAByQf3HUb8islnvImdlc-c_A-JA&sig2=htzRGonUyj4sLX2BHTAHFw&bvm=bv.111396085,d.d24

See page 22, section 11c

[HopOne]

Sorry that should have read page 22 of appendix 3.1 or just search for Camberwell.

[Otta]

edborders Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Why this is important:

>

> People who have a family member buried in the

> Cemeteries may want to know that the council is

> going to be digging up their loved one's grave - a

> plot they bought for eternity.

If a body has been there 75 - 100 years, they are very unlikely to have any living "loved ones".

> If Vodafone sold you a plan with "unlimited

> internet forever" and much later told you they

> would be stopping that, you would scream bloody

> murder. That is what the Council is doing here

> with the graves of your loved ones.

Again, they people in the graves won't have any loved ones alive to care. Plus, if Vodafone sold me a service it would end when I died. The people that paid for these graves 75+ years ago will be dead now.

> And everyone who wants to get buried there may

> want to know that they won't be resting in peace

> forever. Their body will be dug up in 75 years and

> the plot sold off to someone else.

By which time they'll be long dead and won't be able to care.

I must say that I think burial is a ridiculous thing to do with dead bodies, and would happily see it banned. I would also prefer to see the cemetary undisturbed. But your arguments are a nonsense, and the "Southwark Woods" you describe has never existed.

[Siduhe]

I mentioned on the other thread why burial is important to me from a religious/cultural perspective - if you're Catholic it's pretty important - but I have no issue for re-using of my grave after even 20 years. It's the burial that's important, not keeping the headstone or the space for my exclusive use. I recognise it's not the way of the world these days and seen as ridiculous by some (bit harsh, there Otta) but that's how it is for me. One thing I don't understand is why burials still take place "lengthways" - wouldn't it be more space efficient if we buried people "feet first"? There must be some reason, but I have no idea what it is.

Edited because I can't spell

[Otta]

Harsh perhaps, but honest. I actually went to my first burial recently and as I watched thecoffin lowered in to the hole I just stood there thinking "what's the bloody point"?

But rational thought goes out the window as soon as religion gets involved.

[Otta]

I am not trying to offend here by the way, but I just read this

"The care with which we bury the dead expresses our faith in the victory over everlasting death which Our Lord Jesus Christ has won in our human nature by His own Death and Resurrection. We bury the dead in the sure hope of the resurrection of the body, when their mortal bodies will share fully in the glory of the Risen Christ."

But we KNOW the body decomposes, so this makes no sense. And it's a bit harsh on anyone that dies in such a way that their body is not in one piece.

Religion is one thing, but you can't surely believe that on judgement day we're all going to reenact the Thriller video and climb out of our graves.

[Sue]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Religion is one thing, but you can't surely

> believe that on judgement day we're all going to

> reenact the Thriller video and climb out of our

> graves.

Otta, I do think you may inadvertently cause offence, because some branches (probably the wrong word) of Christianity do believe exactly that.

My ex once invited some Jehovah's Witnesses (I think it was) in for a cup of tea and asked them where all the people who had died were physically going to stand on Judgment Day, because there wouldn't be enough space for them all.

They never called again.

[DulwichFox]

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > Religion is one thing, but you can't surely

> > believe that on judgement day we're all going

> to

> > reenact the Thriller video and climb out of our

> > graves.

>

>

> Otta, I do think you may inadvertently cause

> offence, because some branches (probably the wrong

> word) of Christianity do believe exactly that.

>

> My ex once invited some Jehovah's Witnesses (I

> think it was) in for a cup of tea and asked them

> where all the people who had died were physically

> going to stand on Judgment Day, because there

> wouldn't be enough space for them all.

>

> They never called again.

Perhaps the tea was not to their liking... ? :)

Foxy

[Sue]

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sue Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Otta Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> >

> > > Religion is one thing, but you can't surely

> > > believe that on judgement day we're all going

> > to

> > > reenact the Thriller video and climb out of

> our

> > > graves.

> >

> >

> > Otta, I do think you may inadvertently cause

> > offence, because some branches (probably the

> wrong

> > word) of Christianity do believe exactly that.

> >

> > My ex once invited some Jehovah's Witnesses (I

> > think it was) in for a cup of tea and asked

> them

> > where all the people who had died were

> physically

> > going to stand on Judgment Day, because there

> > wouldn't be enough space for them all.

> >

> > They never called again.

>

> Perhaps the tea was not to their liking... ? :)

>

> Foxy

Ha Ha Ha :)) :)) :))

If memory serves, he made quite good tea :))

[Otta]

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta, I do think you may inadvertently cause

> offence, because some branches (probably the wrong

> word) of Christianity do believe exactly that.

Well I don't think people should be offended by someone not believing the same things as they do. That's being closed minded.

And if I get buried (I won't, but just in case) and 200 years later judgement day comes along, I am going to be pretty fed up that I'm stuck with this body.

Minus all it's flesh and internal organs.

[Sue]

You'll still be able to drink a pint.

If you have a mop :))

[Loz]

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> My ex once invited some Jehovah's Witnesses (I

> think it was) in for a cup of tea and asked them

> where all the people who had died were physically

> going to stand on Judgment Day, because there

> wouldn't be enough space for them all.

>

> They never called again.

Estimates vary, but should the dead rise from their graves, there would be about 160-200bn. No problem for standing room, really.

[Sue]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sue Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > My ex once invited some Jehovah's Witnesses (I

> > think it was) in for a cup of tea and asked

> them

> > where all the people who had died were

> physically

> > going to stand on Judgment Day, because there

> > wouldn't be enough space for them all.

> >

> > They never called again.

>

> Estimates vary, but should the dead rise from

> their graves, there would be about 160-200bn. No

> problem for standing room, really.

Surely it would depend when Judgment Day is?

Presumably in every, say, 100 years you're adding the current population of the earth to the number of dead?!

[Siduhe]

Well I don't think people should be offended by someone not believing the same things as they do. That's being closed minded.

Couldn't agree more. I don't expect anyone to feel the same way about the importance of being buried as I do, and I get why this people feel strongly about sustainable end of life options, but it would be nice if it worked the other way round too.

[Otta]

I guess the difference is that you're asking people to "get" a faith. I respect your beliefs and your right to hold them, but I can't honestly say they make any sense to me.