[Cicero]

Well, think about it this way. How would you like it if somebody dug up your parents and displayed them in a museum?

A fair balance needs to be struck. There really was a tendency for scientists to treat Indian remains differently than they would treat the remains of people they knew or were related to.

[DeaconBenjamin]

My point was not that the law is wrong and should be repealed. I support allowing Indians (the ones I've spoken to hate the term Native American) greater control over the remains of their ancestors. I just don't understand the logic of asserting that the display of skeletons would naturally lead the observer to view a group of people as subhuman.

To answer your question directly, I would not be surprised if I had ancestors whose skeletons were on display somewhere. Nor would I be surprised if some had been used as cadavers. It's not a real biggie to me.

[zebra 2]

Bit of a stretch, isn't it? Comparing KM to one's parents? What do you have in mind, P x 1000? I'd say them genes is diluted.

[willyone]

Nine thousand or so years from now what would I care? We are talking pre history here. I personally doubt that in another nine thousand years there will be any museums to be displaying anything.

[lizma]

How would you like it if somebody dug up your parents and displayed them in a museum?

I think the point here is that it wouldn't be your parents but the people who lived in the house next door to your parents and lived several thousand years before they they did.

This more about Native Americans not wanting to give up "we were here first" status.