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