Morality question for the thoughtful: What would you do with a headless body (see more)?

Question

Currently, some (wealthy) people are being cryogenicly frozen so they can be later thawed and cured of what ever ails them (be it disease or even old age).

Many believe that the best way to do this is to cut the head from the body and only freeze the head (this is done because a head can be frozen much more rapidly; and they figure that by the time medical science can cure their disease, they will be able to grow them a new body as well).

MY QUESTION is, if we had the ability to keep the decapitated BODY alive, would we morally obligated to do so?

Thanks for answering...
Please check back for a follow-up question that I will post in the details in about 30 minuets.

FOLLOW UP QUESTION:
Are we obligated to protect the life of a embryo/fetus that has just as much/little capicity for thought as the headless body?

Big Pappa: I only propose that they have the same cognative abilities.

Answer 1

Is this a serious question?

No we'd have no obligation - a person's identity is in their brain - I think the best idea you can get of identity is you are a particular mind in a particular body - but the whole ideal of getting rescued in the future is that they could build you a new body - I think the question is why the hell would they bother? Also many of the frozen heads (let alone the bodys that some are attached to) are probably beyond any hope of recovery. The ice splinters that form in the cells tear them apart.

Answer 2

No. The dead bodies are not our concern, though the bodies be treated with the respect due them. Especially that people not become indignant. I have presupposed that the individuals are dead at the time of "decapitation." Otherwise the act of decapitation itself is immoral. After one is put to death, then my answer still stand.

The capacity of a body is that it will never regain its ability for conscious thought. Whereas, an embryo has the right to proper care that obtain maturity and die naturally, that is, without the intervention of man's determination as to it life being valid.

I view your correlation as invalid, in that a dead or dying body is not the same at all, as an embryo. Do you propose that they are the same?

Answer 3

No, I do not think that it is morally right to try to bring someone back to life that has already been dead. But, I do not think that it is possible anyway. The way that I see it, if there is a God(which there is) then if someone dies, they would either go to heaven or hell( or purgatory or hades, depending on what doctrine you believe in) the point is, we are governed by God. If you are dead 50 years and your body is frozen and then they unfreeze you and try to bring you back, if we are governed by God, do you think that God would allow you just to come back to earth? Our bodies are just shells to house us while we are on earth.



Edit: Yes, we do. At the moment of conception, God has breathed into us the spark of life. At that moment, we are alive and growing and developing. To not protect an embryo is careless and to kill one is murder. IMHO

Answer 4

morality is in the eye of the beholder - the foundation of all being is consciousness; whether is comes from being frozen or out of nothing, it's all the same...for my part, i would rather just flow with the great flow... wherever that takes me


11:11

Answer 5

Sin has no limits. Stan tells all sorts of people all sorts of lies. People will listen to all of these foolish lies just to avoid the truths about life and about God. They will all end up at the same destiny.

Answer 6

What would I do with a headless body? Sell it to somebody.

Answer 7

that all still kinda freaks me out, but i am coming around to the idea, just not quite yet

Answer 8

Pardon me while I go throw up.