A community for people who want to remain as healthy as possible as we age.

When Does Hindering Life Extension Science Become a Crime?

(Zoltan Istvan, Psychology Today) Every human being has both a minimum and a maximum amount of life hours left to live. If you add together the possible maximum life hours of every living person on the planet, you arrive at a special number: the optimum amount of time for our species to evolve, find happiness, and become the most that it can be. Many reasonable people feel we should attempt to achieve this maximum number of life hours for humankind. After all, very few people actually wish to prematurely die or wish for their fellow humans' premature deaths.
In a free and functioning democratic society, it's the duty of our leaders and government to implement laws and social strategies to maximize these life hours that we want to safeguard. Regardless of ideological, political, religious, or cultural beliefs, we expect our leaders and government to protect our lives and ensure the maximum length of our lifespans. Any other behavior cuts short the time human beings have left to live. Anything else becomes a crime of prematurely ending human lives. Anything else fits the common legal term we have for that type of reprehensible behavior: criminal manslaughter.
Community: Wow! Strong statements. And yet, the same people who claim to love fetuses so much that they should never be purposely aborted tend to be the same people who support policies that will restrict research on longevity—and to keep us in economic bondage by trying to stop us from banding together to improve our situation. To my mind, the attempts to keep us economically desperate should be a crime, too.
It’s not just longevity we want, it’s physically and psychologically secure longevity.
[Click the title, above, to post a comment.]


Post a Comment

Please do not give advice. We can best help each other by telling what works for us, not what we think someone else should do.