My intended strategy, for my own parents (who are far more conservative and fundamentalist than yours), is to generate a conflict of beliefs. For instance, we know that fertilized embryos can survive long periods of time frozen. Faced with knowledge, some would have to 1) Give up the belief that unborn embryos have souls, 2) Admit that cryonics can work even if souls exist, or 3) Deny the facts.
(1) implies giving up a cherished anti-abortion stance, which is probably more painful than (2). (3) depends on intellectual honesty, the presentation of sources, etc.
Obviously this won’t work for your more liberal parents. (I don’t even know that it will work with mine.) However, maybe you can find some other belief to conflict against cryonics? Perhaps they are, in general, humanists, and you can point out the convolutions involved in maintaining pro-death humanism?
My intended strategy, for my own parents (who are far more conservative and fundamentalist than yours), is to generate a conflict of beliefs. For instance, we know that fertilized embryos can survive long periods of time frozen. Faced with knowledge, some would have to 1) Give up the belief that unborn embryos have souls, 2) Admit that cryonics can work even if souls exist, or 3) Deny the facts.
(1) implies giving up a cherished anti-abortion stance, which is probably more painful than (2). (3) depends on intellectual honesty, the presentation of sources, etc.
Obviously this won’t work for your more liberal parents. (I don’t even know that it will work with mine.) However, maybe you can find some other belief to conflict against cryonics? Perhaps they are, in general, humanists, and you can point out the convolutions involved in maintaining pro-death humanism?