Zyra's front page //// Cryonics //// Human Rights //// Libertarian Matters //// site indexAnkh - symbol of LifeDustbin - symbol of neo-antidisestablishmentarianistic floccinoccinihilipilification

Cryonics problems

Oppressive government laws compelling you to dispose of your body in the way they tell you

Cryonics is an alternative approach to funeral arrangements in that the body is frozen indefinitely in the hopes that some time in the future it will be possible for the person to be brought back to life. It's unorthodox, but that's no reason why it should be banned. If you want to be frozen and you can afford it, why shouldn't you? But one of the major problems with Cryonics in the early zero-zeros decade is that some governments have a peculiar religious conformist attitude to the rites of the dead, and these governments / bureaucrats / authorities, try to impose their will on people, perhaps in a style of draconian regimes of a bygone age where the State and Church claimed domination over the rights of the people as it was a "divine right". The assumption with this type of religious baggage is that in various religious-sensitive fields such as death, the State has some kind of aristocratic precedence over you, the individual. The State's own stuffy religious beliefs being more important than any that you yourself might happen to have.

You'd have thought that France, a country which surely believes in "La Libertie" and has had a somewhat revolutionary approach to solving problems of aristocracy claiming precedence over the people, would not have fallen into the trap of making up laws that are religion-specific and force people to conform to a state-religion practices, especially in such obvious aspects as the rites of what is done with the body after death. That should be a matter of personal taste and belief.

But no, it appears that in 2002/03 there is a case of an authoritarian council in France going to court to have some cryonics people thawed out and be either rotted away or burnt. Remember: It's not a matter of hygiene, as frozen bodies are inert and do not spread disease. It is a matter of personal belief. This is especially so if you DON'T believe in cryonics. For surely if you don't believe in cryonics you must accept that the believers in cryonics are believing in it because it is based on FAITH. It's their faith that they'll be brought back to life in some gloriously utopian future. One of the things about faith is that it is now generally accepted that if someone believes something (by faith) which in your opinion is not true, you don't force them to stick to what you believe, but instead let them get on with what they believe and what they want to do. If it doesn't do anyone else any harm, there is no problem. French cryonicists Dr Raymond Martinot and his wife Monique were doing no harm being frozen in Neuil-sur-Layon, and should have the liberty to remain frozen peacefully.

So, what do you do about it if the government has got the idea that their faith is more important than yours to the point that they'll desecrate your grave? The first thing to do is to point out the error and see if they realise they haven't thought it through properly. Maybe a change of policy may happen, a reform to bring the laws versus rights into a more modern century. If that doesn't work, it has to be understood that governments that don't respect people's rights historically don't last - they are overthrown.

Have your say about Human Rights and Cryonics. Comparison of ratings of human rights in different countries. e-mail