Comments about ‘Remains of 53 people unearthed during construction to be laid to rest again in southern Utah’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, March 19 2012 10:00 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
SME
Kearns, UT

The tribal leader implies that the burial ground was disturbed because the "white men" didn't care about it. I don't think a thousand-year-old "white" burial ground would be treated any differently. Prejudice and racial incidents certainly still exist. Making issues up reduces the response to actual problems.

annewandering
oakley, idaho

I dont know why any burial grounds are disturbed, no matter the cultural identity. Fortunately there have been steps taken to show more respect than in the past. Why were the bones even removed to start with? The relatives should have been involved in deciding from the very beginning. They might have preferred the remains be left as they were, even if the ground was going to be covered with water. Did anyone ask?
Still its good that they werent just dug up and sent to the Smithsonian. :)

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

SME:
The tribal leader implies that the burial ground was disturbed because the "white men" didn't care about it.

I would agree with who know a 1,000 years from now.
But the white men in Southern Utah have a reputation for "Caring about native burials."

Rifleman
Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: annewandering 12:58 p.m. March 20, 2012
"The relatives should have been involved in deciding from the very beginning."

According to the story "Archaeologists say the people were originally buried about 1,000 years ago." I'm going to guess that the relatives have long since died and no one knows the identities of the deceased. Its not like they were just buried last week.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments