X-Message-Number: 1811 Date: Wed, 24 Feb 93 01:00:18 CST From: Brian Wowk <> Subject: CRYONICS member exclusion Brian Wowk: >> An Alcor member is someone who pays dues and gets a magazine. >> I don't see how anyone paying dues and getting a magazine can threaten >> my survival. Of course, there is also a contractual obligation to >> provide suspension services, but Alcor already reserves the right to >> exercise discretion in performing suspensions under dangerous >> circumstances. Keith Henson: > I was not aware of this clause. Could you give me a pointer to it? A 1992 draft of the new Alcor information brochure by Ralph Whelan ended with the following section: > NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY > &&The Alcor Life Extension Foundation believes that every human has a > right to choose and arrange for his or her own cryonic suspension and to > enjoy its possible benefits of greatly extended lifespan. To this end, > the Alcor Life Extension Foundation does not discriminate against any > person on the basis of race, religion, color, creed, age, marital status, > national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation or preference, medical > condition, or handicap. > Although Alcor typically accepts cases involving AIDS, HIV infection, > and other communicable diseases, nothing in this statement prevents Alcor > from avoiding any situation that genuinely threatens the health or safety > of Alcor employees, volunteers, patients in suspension, or the public, or > from requiring reasonable medical evaluations in some instances where a > genuine threat to health or safety may be suspected to exist, or where the > legal status of an individual with regard to mental competency may be in > question. I think these thoughts are very good (and well put). I had assumed they represented Alcor policy. Keith: > You seem to be saying that Alcor (as an artificial person) should > hold itself to accepting contracts *involuntarily*, ... How can a person "hold themselves" to something involuntarily? Of course all business dealings must be voluntary and by mutual consent. What I am saying is that it is in Alcor's best interests to *voluntarily* be as liberal as possible in accepting members into the organization. Anyone who pays their dues and maintains suspension funding should be able to be a member. Revoking memberships when members do "damage to the organization" is a very bad idea because "damage to the organization" cannot be accurately defined. In fact, in the context of recent events the idea smacks of enforced ideological/political conformity. --- Brian Wowk Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=1811