The common expression, is "reaping what you sow", but it would also be possible to sow what you reap if what you were reaping were from the previous harvest. Then you sow it afterwards with new seeds and henceforth sow what you reap.
It is sort of like the "chicken and the egg" conundrum... whether you believe the chicken or egg came first depends upon your philosophical perspective. If you believe in God, then you would believe that the chicken came first because the chicken would be the object of God's creation. You could say that the chicken was created as a miracle, or that the egg was not of a chicken egg and maybe was laid by a salamander or some other egg-laying species.
Inversely, atheists would generally choose the rational/scientific perspective that a chicken cannot be born without some sort of egg, which must be therefore a chicken egg or some sort of evolutionary equivalent void of miracles of God, springing from some sort of scientific explanation for evolution and creation.
In this scenario, perhaps people really are sowing what they reap, because Bruce, however he may have been in real life, was a quite despicable poster. So if what we all reaping were hateful posts and emails , then postmortem what is being sown is a picture of Bruce as a kinder and gentle human. But clearly there are those who rightfully object to that personification.
My personal view is that Bruce was a nice guy who was poisoned by a rather large amount of social anxiety which manifested itself in bizarre ways on the internet. That in no way justifies his behavior, however. I don't think it's fair to take shots at someone postmortem, but to recognize that someone was less than a perfect human being is fair game.
|