X-Message-Number: 26453
From: "Brent Fox" <>
Subject: RE: Pizer's lawsuit proposal
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 16:18:18 -0400

David,

I must also voice my opposition to such a lawsuit.  In all the various
discussions on CryoNet, I don't believe anyone has mentioned the
unconstitutionality that such a proposition would entail even if in the very
unlikely event the suit was affirmed.  There are many legal precedents where
the separation of church and state has been established.  Lately, the
testing of the Ten Commandments being displayed on public property has been
the forefront.  The constitutionality of prayer in public schools also comes
to mind.  The separation of church and state provides that the government
does not have the authority to dictate ecclesiastical matters.  What you are
proposing is a change in religious doctrine (foremost Christianity) enforced
by the government.	 Any lawyer worth his salt will mention to you these
six words, "Establishment Clause of the First Amendment."

I strongly feel that such a lawsuit as you propose would be detrimental to
the future of cryonics.   I ask that you look at the recent history of
cryonics, in particular the fallout of the Ted Williams saga.  The Cryonics
Institute took a spanking from the State of Michigan, which was a set up to
use as a precedent in support for the Arizona house bill which targeted
Alcor. Had the Arizona house bill passed, it would have significantly
hampered Alcor's operation.   

Any money that you would spend on your lawsuit would be better used to help
defend cryonics from hostile legislation.  Perhaps a legal fund could even
be established to protect individuals from discrimination for being a
cryonicist, and Venturist?

David, it is not my intention to support religion, as I think the world
would probably be better off without it, but please give up this jihad.   It
is not worth the risk to our future.


Best regards,


Brent Fox

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26453