EDITORIAL – “Bodies” controversy should not be a priority

The “Bodies: The Exhibition” show at the Carnegie Science Center was met with recent criticism… The “Bodies: The Exhibition” show at the Carnegie Science Center was met with recent criticism yesterday, when freshman state Rep. Michael E. Fleck, R-Huntingdon, introduced a bill that would help administer the exhibition of human cadavers.

According to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, “The bill would ban the commercial exhibition of human cadavers without written consent from the deceased or their next of kin that clearly states the person’s intent to be used in a profit-making enterprise.”

Unlike similar exhibitions, like “Body Worlds,” which appeared in Philadelphia from 2005 to 2006, “Bodies: The Exhibition” uses cadavers without consent from the deceased or their families. According to the show’s promoter, Premier Exhibitions of Atlanta, these bodies were unclaimed and legally acquired in China. However, a recent report by ABC said that some of the bodies came from executed prisoners.

The controversy surrounding the show is more than justified. Not only has the exhibition’s promoter failed to acquire appropriate consent, but there is also ambiguity regarding the treatment of those prisoners. It leads us to wonder whether China was partaking in any foul play.

Do we know why the inmates were in jail to begin with and exactly how they died? All of this raises further questions about China’s overall human rights situation.

The fact that the United States is engaging in such a gross human rights violation is disturbing, and Fleck’s initiative will help to prevent such a controversy in the future.

But, at the same time, it doesn’t seem as if Fleck necessarily has his priorities straight. Rather, he strikes us as a freshman congressman who is determined to try and get his name out, getting fired up about an issue that, for many Pennsylvanians, is largely irrelevant. As far as Pennsylvania goes, there are more pertinent issues that should be addressed.

For example, state officials can spend their valuable time ironing out the open-records law, specifically how it is to be administered and what exactly qualifies as an open record.

Or, perhaps they can pass legislation on issues that matter most to Pennsylvanians, like improving transportation and building infrastructure or enhancing the job market to increase opportunities for more people.

Fleck told the Post-Gazette that because “the Carnegie Science Center has been getting about $250,000 a year in state funding