The following is my posted reply to a message early this morning on
sci.life-extension - http://tinyurl.com/2dagvx

Mike wrote:
> Hi sci.life-extension contributors and all.
>
> Your help is requested with this important political initiative.
>
> If you agree with this petition as I do, then please add your signature.
>
> http://www.petitiononline.com/CEL/petition.html

While I expect that none of the signers (26 at the time I looked)
would themselves take money from the pockets of others, even
strangers, they all are quite willing to ask, even demand, that
government do so - more than it's already taking. Is it possible that
none of these people, and anyone else who encourages the use of
government money, do not understand that all money spent by
governments is stolen - taxed - from those within the reach of that
particular government? It is wrong for an individual to take what is
not hirs (his/hers) and that taking does not become right merely
because some group of individuals has banded together and decided that
they want some portion of the income and spending (or particular
financial assets themselves) of those who live or travel within the
boundaries of the area in which that group puts out enforcers to their
decisions (laws/regulations) , thereby effectively becoming a
government. (Some readers may have thought that I was only talking
about the Mafia or warlords:-) Even if some of the residents of an
area are agreeable to having their assets be taxed because they agree
with the purposes for which the money will be spent, this does not
make the taxing any less a violation of the others (not to mention a
very inefficient method of cooperative voluntary funding of projects).
And this doesn't include the many who *don't* agree but are
effectively unheard because they know that refusing the taking of
their money would result in fines and/or imprisonment, and even death
if they physically resisted.

My total disagreement with this petition - and any group whose purpose
is to get a government to spend money (always taxed/stolen) - does not
mean that I do not want to see research in life-extension. (In fact, I
want it very much; Paul would say, "with every fiber of my being".) I
simply do not want money stolen/taxed from those who do not want their
money spent this way. I want to see those people who value having an
unbounded lifespan put some of their money and efforts into seeing
that this take place. I want to see those people use their talents of
persuasion towards others who do not yet hold the same convictions of
the possibility of living extremely long healthy lives. I do not want
to see these people demand that government fund projects, with money
it takes via its enforcers.

It is refreshing to see a group of people work towards the goal of
eliminating the causes of aging without making use of thugs
(government enforcers) to obtain funds. While I do not agree with many
of the statements made by Bill Faloon of the Life Extension Foundation
(LEF) in his editorials and elsewhere and also the LEF practice of
often including biased magazine articles towards the use of its own
supplements, I do commend that organization's heavy investment into
anti-aging research. (It is a negative factor that much of this
investment is in the area of cryonics which many members are not fully
aware and/or do not find valuable enough to have preservation
contracts with one of the few existing cryonics organizations.)

Instead of gathering petitions to enlist increased government
thuggery, the author of this petition and its signers would
demonstrate true character by putting more time - and maybe more of
their own assets - into persuading other individuals to pledge funds
for conquering aging in a manner similar to what was started with the
Prometheus Project for suspended animation achievement (in 20 years of
start);
http://web.archive.org/web/19980524022025/http://www.prometheus-project.org/
Many people will not join an effort until and unless a considerable
number of others will do likewise. These same individuals who are
unwilling to be among the first to accept a new idea or to contribute
funds to a large challenging project will do so when they see that
others are positive toward those ideas or have begun to make
contributions of time and/or money. So a pledge type arrangement where
no money is actually collected until a particular level of yearly
funding is reached is a way by which the support of more people can be
gained and a momentum built.

While some may say that the Methuselah Foundation (Mouse Project) is
doing something similar to my suggestion, that organization's (and its
spokesperson's) early practice of equating non-contribution for
anti-aging research to actual killing is reprehensible illogic. The
fact that the wording of that group has been changed to saving x
numbers of people - only after logical refutation by Paul Wakfer in
discourse with Aubrey de Grey (a signer of this petition) here on
sci.life-extension - does not detract from the fact that enlisting
government money is to ask for stolen money and actually encourage
more stealing.
So I will not sign such a petition and urge others to also not sign it
for the same reason. I urge the Methuselah Foundation - or any other
group or compendium of groups - to purge themselves of the temptation
to get government taxing agents to do their fund raising for them and
instead create a massive pledge program. It will take more personal
effort towards informing and educating than is now being done, but the
money will come from those who truly want the results. And the fact
that the research is purposely being done without tax money will
likely impress many of those who would have had their money stolen for
something with which they did not agree. With the outreach
technologically possible on the Internet and the cooperation of
numerous existing anti-aging groups, being read and even seen and
heard (streamed video) by large numbers of people around the world is
possible. And the persuasive argument of personally supporting one's
goals (putting one's money where one's mouth is) has much power,
especially when coupled with a pledge arrangement conditional on a
specified yearly funding total *before* any actual money is collected.
If such a project is begun, then I and Paul will be among the first to
pledge $1000 per year for the rest of our lives.

>
> If you would like to read about CEL,
>
> http://www.coalitiontoextendlife.org/

From the above webpage:
"Remember, the preamble to our Constitution states that we have, "The
right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." C.E.L. will
make sure that the right to life means an immortal one for all of us."

There is no collective "we" in the sense of life, liberty or pursuit
of happiness. Only the individual is capable of life, possessing
liberty and pursuing happiness. This is one of the errors of the US
Constitution and similar documents, and has warped the thinking of
large numbers of their readers.

While I agree with the idea that any existing government be entreated
not to interfere with the mutually beneficial voluntary actions of
individuals who seek to extend life, this does not extend to
"promot[ing] indefinite life extension as a public policy goal of the
United States." This group would saddle the US taxpayer with yet
another "War", this time on aging. The fact that government already
funds with taxpayer money vast amounts of research on similarly vast
numbers of subjects does not mean that taking a little bit more is OK.
None of this government funding is proper, but is factually
reprehensible theft. The atmosphere of government "provision" (like
parents or Santa Claus) in virtually all aspects of life that has
grown steadily for the past 100 years in the US is the major factor
for the reduction in self-reliance and self-responsibility. The
government "carrot" (paid for by taxpayer money) comes at the expense
of lost personal integrity, gone when there is little self-reliance,
self-responsibility and self-esteem.

>
> I think Tom Mooney has some fresh political ideas and he has the
ability to
> see them through.

No, his ideas are no different than others who think that governments
speak for all who are, by that government's decrees, bounded by its
jurisdictions. In this way he appears to think that if the majority of
representatives of that populace (actually only the "winning" fraction
of those who voted) want to take money from that populace, for
whatever reason he is convinced is admirable, then that is a good and
proper thing to do. I hope that there are sufficient numbers of people
who do not want this type of fresh idea - another government "War on
_____". Governments are about power and force, not persuasion and
free cooperation.

I would like to see this Coalition to Extend Life (CEL) shed itself of
the idea that government solutions are the only ones that can take on
large projects and achieve success. I would like to see its organizers
(founder and Executive Director, Tom Mooney) acknowledge that
government money is not produced but instead is taken/stolen/taxed
from people whose only alternative to not paying is a fine,
imprisonment or even death if they physically resist. I would like to
see the organizers of this group take the high ground of persuasion
for funding (contributions and pledges as described above) rather than
become another Washington DC lobbying group out to grab a slice of the
taxpayer pie.

CEL could be a very effective umbrella group for disseminating
anti-aging research (actual and potential) information to all segments
of the population (if one wants to put individuals into various groups
for purposes of approach via reasons specifically addressed to their
special interest), organizing fund raising and disseminating and
overseeing such funds itself. I urge the organizers of this group to
refuse the temptation of the government "carrot" - and thereby avoid
much of the "stick" and all of the inherent philosophical distortions
- and rather to encourage self-reliance and self-responsibility from
those who want to see the goal of anti-aging research - an unbounded
lifespan.


>
> This is the beginning of the "...plan to solicit 1,000,000
signatures...".
>
> Here is a brief message from Tom:
>
> "I would be more than willing to answer any questions that people
have about
> me. Briefly, I have been involved in politics and law for a long
time. I
> served as a member in the Maryland General Assembly for eight years,
was a
> nominee for Governor in 1978, practiced law, and I was a columnist
for over
> ten years. That is merely a perfunctory biography and I would be
glad to
> elaborate at your convenience."
>
> If you have problems with the wording of the petition, please
contact Tom.
> He indicated he is willing to discuss the subject with you. If you
agree
> with the main objective, please sign the petition and work out the
details
> later.
>
> Best regards,
> Mike Cooper

This is also being sent to info@...

**Kitty Antonik Wakfer

MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org
Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality
Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org
Rational freedom by self-sovereignty & social contracting