Wickipedia Cites Serious Ethical Objections, Case Really Closed?

Wickipedia presents these objections to the plastination exhibits.

"Professional ethicists, human rights activists and religious leaders have also objected. "Given the (Chinese) government's track record on the treatment of prisoners, I find this exhibit deeply problematic," said Sharon Hom, the executive director of the advocacy group Human Rights in China.[28]

"Professor Anita Allen, a University of Pennsylvania bioethicist, argued spending money to "gawk" at human remains should raise serious concerns.[29] Thomas Hibbs, Baylor University ethicist, compares cadaver displays to pornography in that they reduce the subject to “the manipulation of body parts stripped of any larger human significance.”[30]

"Even if consent were to be obtained, Rabbi Danny Schiff maintains that we should still question what providing "bodies arranged in showcases for a hungry public" says about a society.[31] Harry Wu, a long-time human rights activist, terms the practice of obtaining exhibit specimens from China "immoral" and describes how the Chinese label of 'unclaimed' on bodies may imply that families were not notified of the death.[28][32]

"Regarding the educational concerns around these exhibits, St. Louis Diocese Archbishop Raymond Burke directs Catholic Schools there to avoid field trips, citing serious questions for Catholics.[33] Prior to the exhibit's opening in Pittsburgh, the Pittsburgh Catholic Diocese endorsed the educational content of the exhibition, while noting that it would not be appropriate for everyone and welcoming continued discourse regarding the place of such exhibits in society.[34] Rev. Daniel Pilarczyk, Archbishop of Cincinnati, issued a statement “I do not believe that this exhibit is an appropriate destination for field trips by our Catholic schools.” .[35]

"In 2006, citing concern over how 'some kids will process these images,' Abbotsford, British Columbia School Superintendent Des McKay barred field trips to exhibits of plasticized human beings.[36] In an editorial, Lutheran Reverend Christoph Reiners questioned the effect on the values of children.[37]

"Elaine Catz, who helped coordinate field trips for the Carnegie Science Center prior to resigning in June 2007, maintains 'it teaches that, once he is deceased, there is nothing wrong with taking a person's body without his consent; it teaches that there is nothing wrong with exploiting the dead in order to make a profit, as long as it is in the name of science or education or art. It teaches that it is incredibly easy to dehumanize others.'"[23] [See Wikipedia for footnotes.]

Despite University Health Care's assurances that this exhibit meets their criteria for ethical science education, you leave less than convinced that this is little more than a prurient secular celebration of hedonist interest made "scientific' - resembling more Frankenstein than Lazarus.