From: Rick Strongitharm (xllb@home.com)
Date: Tue Jan 18 2000 - 18:01:14 MST
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-extropians@extropy.com
[mailto:owner-extropians@extropy.com]On Behalf Of john grigg
Sent: January 18, 2000 12:34 AM
To: extropians-digest@extropy.org
Subject: cryonics and abortion
>>Daniel Ust wrote:
>>Perhaps we could analyze this problem from two angles. One would be
>>technical feasability. The other is whether Right to Life groups >would
be
>>willing to support -- financially, politically, or morally >-- this
option.
>> What do you think?
john grigg wrote:
>Paul Wakfer tried to promote this idea when he created the Prometheus
>Project whose goal was to develop and implement fully reversible
suspension.
> Of course present suspension methods are NOT reversible and this will
>really limit the ability to drum up public support.
>I agree that many women who go in for abortions would not want the baby to
>be cryosuspended. They want the potential human being (child) killed as a
>matter of convenience. Of course where is the father in situations like
>this?
>And to suspend the child would definitely raise expenses for the abortion
>clinics. I don't think they would want their high profit margins to be
>interfered with.
I could post the question hypothetically on a Religion Message Board,
contributed to primarily by Medical Transcriptionists. The responses would
probably span the spectrum, from the ultra-fundamentalists, who would see it
as the compromise that it is. More Liberal Christians might find a Saint
who brings dignity to the suspended unborn.
I'm exchristian, but I find no pleasure in tormenting Believers, by throwing
new challenges at their faith. On the other hand, rarely, but occasionally
a mind will open. It happened to me.
It could become a very divisive issue in a sadly fractured Religion.
Rick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:26:19 MST