Re: Precisions on the Martinot situation

From: JDP (jacques@dtext.com)
Date: Thu Jul 24 2003 - 09:04:30 MDT

  • Next message: Spike: "RE: Global Carbon Cycle [was RE: Number of carbon atoms in the Earth's biomass]"

    Brett Paatsch a écrit (24.7.2003/23:12) :
    > I'd not realised the restrictions on free speach went so
    > far in France. By "condemned" do you mean that it is
    > actually illegal or just politically incorrect?

    Actually illegal.

    You know, it's really like in a family. Someone says something, and
    the mother says: "Don't say that!"

    I am sure it was common in the ancestral tribe, too.

    See how Damien recently reacted to a suggestion by Robert :-)

    > If I was going to try and resolve a similar legal
    > problem with cryonics in Australia I'd look to the
    > civil libertarian organisations as natural allies.

    I do not know of the existence of such an organization here. I know
    some that supposedly care about freedom of speech, or privacy rights,
    or consumers rights, or minorities rights, but I don't know any that
    generally cares about individual liberties, in a way that might extend
    to cryonics.

    You have those that defend the liberty to have babies at all costs,
    that sort of things. But I don't think their charter will extend to
    cryonics.

    I will contact a few organizations who are libertarian-oriented, as
    they might be the most receptive. I will get them to read the article
    by David Nicholas about immortality (that I have translated and
    published at <http://dtext.com/transition/nicholas/nicholas1.html>)
    and see if they are interested to do something before the Conseil
    d'Etat gives its decision.

    Thanks for your input.

    Jacques



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 24 2003 - 09:11:27 MDT