[extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics andlegislation

[Brett Paatsch]

"devon fowler" wrote:

... I'm going to start writing to some of the congress people
to try to abolish the council on bioethics as you have alluded
to in previous conversation.
------

If you have never written a congressman I reckon that would be
a good experience for you. You would be learning about practical
politics by doing and about how to exert political influence above
and beyond your single vote (especially if you understood that was 
what you were doing). That would be a life lesson you could build
on. 

Note though. It is probably not the "[C/c]ongress people's Council on
Bioethics" that you are concerned with. Nor is it the first structure
ostensibly about ethics or even bioethics set up by politicians to consider
bioethics or ethics from one particular point of view.

If you want to know whose council on bioethics is the one you are 
concerned about perhaps consider its formal name. In 2004, in 
developed western countries, a council comprised of homo-sapiens is
not "owned" like you or I might own say a menagerie of companion
animals. Or not *very* like ;-). But it IS *owned* in the political sense
by the person whose authority is in the name.   

You might see it written in capitalised form something like 
"Knucklehead's Council for Bioethics" or some such. 

Here's a further political tip. "Knucklehead's Council for Bioethics"
is unlikely to be called "Knucklehead's Council for Bioethics" for long
if Knucklehead is not a name but a role. 

It is extremely unlikely that Knucklehead number 44 will chose to 
use the title "Knucklehead's Council for Bioethics" when the 44th
person in the role replaces the 43rd because the 44th person will
want to re-brand. And if the 44th person is not smart enough to
know they should rebrand they probably will not be politcally smart
enough to be the 44th person in the Knucklehead role. 

Regards,
Brett Paatsch