Mandatory organ donation

[zantax]

Shouldn't the government force people to "donate" their organs upon death? I mean, it's obvious they won't be needing them, that it's for the greater good and would save many thousands of lives. Aren't we our brother's keeper and isn't it a moral imperative to save as many lives as possible? Seems like a perfect fit for this administration and current congress to me.

Of course it's destructive of personal liberty and has huge potential for abuse but so what? That's not stopping them from pushing very similar ideas in regard to individuals giving up personal liberty in the name of the greater collective good. Of course I'm against it as I believe personal liberty trumps even the obvious benefits of saving so many lives, but then again, I am a selfish conservative republican. I think it illustrates pretty well the main argument between the right and the left, whether or not government should have the power to force people to "do the right thing" for the greater good or not. And it's a very unambiguous issue in terms of whether or not it would be beneficial, unlike cap and trade or universal healthcare. So I don't expect any liberals to come into the thread and oppose the idea, at least not if they want to lay claim to any semblance of internal logical consistency.

[zantax]

And before you ask, yes, I am already an organ donor. But that was my free choice.

[nortman]

And before you ask, yes, I am already an organ donor. But that was my free choice.
Ditto, I wonder if they would penalize my family since I only have 1 kidney to give.

[zantax]

Ditto, I wonder if they would penalize my family since I only have 1 kidney to give.


Well, if you had two and a fellow citizen needed one of them to save their life shouldn't the government force you to donate it?

[mpodlesny]

Dont give them any more stupid ideas...heck they might even tax me more than you because I have two kidneys and you only have one.

[nortman]

It wouldn't surprise me if they believed that they should.

[nortman]

Dont give them any more stupid ideas...heck they might even tax me more than you because I have two kidneys and you only have one.

I hadn't thought of that. I'm a minority because I only have 1 kidney. I wonder if I can get some money from the government because of that. :think:

[Ninjacorpse]

Anything is possible.

[mpodlesny]

I hadn't thought of that. I'm a minority because I only have 1 kidney. I wonder if I can get some money from the government because of that. :think:
you qualify for government checks...I think you should apply :)

[MrCapitalism]

Shouldn't the government force people to "donate" their organs upon death? I mean, it's obvious they won't be needing them, that it's for the greater good and would save many thousands of lives. Aren't we our brother's keeper and isn't it a moral imperative to save as many lives as possible? Seems like a perfect fit for this administration and current congress to me.


I would actually support this. Not to the extent you put later in the thread where a healthy person should have to donate one working kidney, then you are just getting silly. But yeah, upon death if your organs work you should be donating them. I commend you for being a donor zantax.

[zantax]

I would actually support this. Not to the extent you put later in the thread where a healthy person should have to donate one working kidney, then you are just getting silly. But yeah, upon death if your organs work you should be donating them. I commend you for being a donor zantax.

Good for you, so we have one liberal that favors the collective good over personal liberty and freedom so far.

[mpodlesny]

Good for you, so we have one liberal that favors the collective good over personal liberty and freedom so far.
well liberals need people to think for them, so are you really surprised that a liberal would think like this?

[toreyj01]

I would actually support this. Not to the extent you put later in the thread where a healthy person should have to donate one working kidney, then you are just getting silly. But yeah, upon death if your organs work you should be donating them. I commend you for being a donor zantax.
I actually do not, theres a lot of religious folks that believe if you go to the pearly gates or what have you with a tattoo or a missing organ, you don't get in.

Not being an organ donor, to me, is selfish.

But you have to respect others religious beliefs, even if this is the ultimate act of charity, which I believe most prophets would have found wonderful.

The metaphor, by the way, is very silly.

[MrCapitalism]

Good for you, so we have one liberal that favors the collective good over personal liberty and freedom so far.


Well think about it. In many cases, autopsies are required by law (say if you die not in the care of a hospice or hospital). In that they take out your organs and weigh them, then jam them back in the body like a human shaped sausage.

Call me a nut, but I'm more worried about freedom when I'm living. If someone wants to feed my body through a wood chipper and spray it over a garden, that is fine by me. What would I care?

[kenpoman]

yet another faux outrage thread.

will all the issues we face, folks insist on wallowing
in idiocy like this.

and then seem to genuinely wonder why the GOP
is irrevellant nationally

[MrCapitalism]

I actually do not, theres a lot of religious folks that believe if you go to the pearly gates or what have you with a tattoo or a missing organ, you don't get in.

Not being an organ donor, to me, is selfish.

But you have to respect others religious beliefs, even if this is the ultimate act of charity, which I believe most prophets would have found wonderful.

The metaphor, by the way, is very silly.

I guess that is true and you bring up a good point. Obviously you would have to have religious exceptions if such an idea were to take hold.

[zantax]

I guess that is true and you bring up a good point. Obviously you would have to have religious exceptions if such an idea were to take hold.


Why? Are there religious exemptions for cap and trade or universal healthcare or any other number of intrusive government ideas?

[MrCapitalism]

Why? Are there religious exemptions for cap and trade or universal healthcare or any other number of intrusive government ideas?


Are there religious objections to cap and trade?

[zantax]

yet another faux outrage thread.

Sorry, you don't get to decide what other people are outraged about, not to mention the word outrage appears nowhere in the op.

will all the issues we face, folks insist on wallowing
in idiocy like this.Feel free to skip this thread if you don't find my hypothetical to be worthy of discussion.

and then seem to genuinely wonder why the GOP
is irrevellant nationallyYes we know, you guys won two elections and now the GOP can never, ever win again, we're going to give it a shot anyway, thanks for your concern though.

[zantax]

Are there religious objections to cap and trade?

Would it matter if there were?

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

Good for you, so we have one liberal that favors the collective good over personal liberty and freedom so far.What do you care?
You're dead. You no longer have liberty and freedom.

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

yet another faux outrage thread.

will all the issues we face, folks insist on wallowing
in idiocy like this.

and then seem to genuinely wonder why the GOP
is irrevellant nationally
And pathetic, ridiculous hypotheticals. I'm not even arguing them anymore. Just agree, "Yeah, you're right. That's an outrage." and move on...

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

Are there religious objections to cap and trade?I'm sure they'll come up with something. Give 'em time.

[zantax]

What do you care?
You're dead. You no longer have liberty and freedom.

I care because I value my ability to decide what happens to my remains while I am still alive to make those decisions. I care because my body belongs to me and does not revert to the state upon my death. Cemetaries are a waste of land, we should have the government mandate cremation, wait, that would add to global warming, what should the government do with our, I mean, their, dead bodies?

[Gaetano "Tommy" Lucchese]

I don't see why anyone wouldn't be an organ donor. What the hell do you need them for?

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

I care because I value my ability to decide what happens to my remains while I am still alive to make those decisions. I care because my body belongs to me and does not revert to the state upon my death. Cemetaries are a waste of land, we should have the government mandate cremation, wait, that would add to global warming, what should the government do with our, I mean, their, dead bodies?
Of course. You're right about something that doesn't occur and never will. Oh woe is me.

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

I care because I value my ability to decide what happens to my remains while I am still alive to make those decisions. I care because my body belongs to me and does not revert to the state upon my death.

BTW, how would you know in any case? You're, like dead or something.

[zantax]

And pathetic, ridiculous hypotheticals. I'm not even arguing them anymore. Just agree, "Yeah, you're right. That's an outrage." and move on...


What's ridiculous about this hypothetical? Are you under the impression that this idea hasn't been proposed or bandied about for years?

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

What's ridiculous about this hypothetical? Are you under the impression that this idea hasn't been proposed or bandied about for years?

Yeah, you're right. That's an outrage.

[kenpoman]

And pathetic, ridiculous hypotheticals. I'm not even arguing them anymore. Just agree, "Yeah, you're right. That's an outrage." and move on...

I'm beginning to think this nation has lost its mind.

roughly 1/2 of the country went deranged and elected an unproven socialist
the other 1/2 has lost control of its intellectual bowels.

some examples:
Texas wants to leave (let them, sooner the better)
gays may want reperations
organ donation may be forced
the unending speculation on Obama's birth certificate
same with his being a closet muslim

[kenpoman]

What's ridiculous about this hypothetical?

everything.

[MrCapitalism]

Would it matter if there were?

Considering religious freedom is a constitutional protection, yes it would matter.

[zantax]

Considering religious freedom is a constitutional protection, yes it would matter.

Ok, I am starting a new religion that doesn't believe government should be able to impose more then 10% total taxes on people post haste. It doesn't matter and you know it.

[zantax]

Yeah, you're right. That's an outrage.

The only people using the "O" word are you guys.

[Ninjacorpse]

What if the other person doesn't want my organ can the government still force them to take it?

[Dr. Funkenstein]

I'm already a donor, so it wouldn't matter to me personally if it were mandated.

And if you could prove that your religion doesn't allow for you to donate your organs, that would exempt you from being "forced" to do so.

[zantax]

And for those that think such an idea could never happen, simply google "presumed consent".

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

What if the other person doesn't want my organ can the government still force them to take it?
Absolutely. Whether they need it or not. Outrageous, isn't it?

[zantax]

I'm already a donor, so it wouldn't matter to me personally if it were mandated.

And if you could prove that your religion doesn't allow for you to donate your organs, that would exempt you from being "forced" to do so.


What a bizarre world view. So no one should mind the government making mandatory anything they already do voluntarily? I already go to work, why would I mind it being mandatory? I already volunteer at my local church, why would I mind it being mandatory? I already watch Fox and Friends in the morning, why should I mind it being mandatory?

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

I'm beginning to think this nation has lost its mind.

roughly 1/2 of the country went deranged and elected an unproven socialist
the other 1/2 has lost control of its intellectual bowels.

some examples:
Texas wants to leave (let them, sooner the better)
gays may want reperations
organ donation may be forced
the unending speculation on Obama's birth certificate
same with his being a closet muslim

Well personally, I have enough real things to be ****ed off about without getting worked up over hypotheticals and lies.

[kenpoman]

And for those that think such an idea could never happen, simply google "presumed consent".

any chance you ever worked in healthcare?
EG, you know the anvil I'm about to drop.

BTW: you can also google the church of the risen elvis.
you can google damn near anything.

doesn't make it real

[Ninjacorpse]

Absolutely. Whether they need it or not. Outrageous, isn't it?

*snickers*

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

What a bizarre world view. So no one should mind the government making mandatory anything they already do voluntarily? I already go to work, why would I mind it being mandatory? I already volunteer at my local church, why would I mind it being mandatory? I already watch Fox and Friends in the morning, why should I mind it being mandatory?

Strawmanning your own premise. Gotta love it :lol:

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

any chance you ever worked in healthcare?
EG, you know the anvil I'm about to drop.

BTW: you can also google the church of the risen elvis.
you can google damn near anything.

doesn't make it real

Some countries have laws where it's presumed that a person has consented to donation UNLESS the person has stated otherwise. Which kinda ruins his premise of a 'omg they're going to steal my organs against my will' kind of thing.

[zantax]

Well personally, I have enough real things to be ****ed off about without getting worked up over hypotheticals and lies.


Right, this could never happen here, it's a ridiculous premise, by the way, are you aware of the 1978 Georgia law that allows for corneal harvesting if no prior objection is on record?

[kenpoman]

Some countries have laws where it's presumed that a person has consented to donation UNLESS the person has stated otherwise. Which kinda ruins his premise of a 'omg they're going to steal my organs against my will' kind of thing.

unless things have changed drastically since I worked in healthcare,
the hoops required to jump thru to prove the implied consent are
so daunting its often not worth it.

I got no problem with flipping the law to say you will donate unless
you state otherwise as long as the option is clearly laid out to
the citizenry. and every time you renew your licence you get to
renew your objections.

consenting adults, BTW. no implied consent with opt out for minors
in my world

[curtis123]

Coming to a bureaucracy near you...the Czar of Spare Parts.

So now our dead are a national resource?

[kenpoman]

Right, this could never happen here, it's a ridiculous premise, by the way, are you aware of the 1978 Georgia law that allows for corneal harvesting if no prior objection is on record?

which means you CAN object.
so much for that theory.

you need to find a new strawman. this one's burnt to the ground.
quit while you're not too far behind

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

Right, this could never happen here, it's a ridiculous premise, by the way, are you aware of the 1978 Georgia law that allows for corneal harvesting if no prior objection is on record?
Which means it's not mandatory.

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

unless things have changed drastically since I worked in healthcare,
the hoops required to jump thru to prove the implied consent are
so daunting its often not worth it.

I got no problem with flipping the law to say you will donate unless
you state otherwise as long as the option is clearly laid out to
the citizenry. and every time you renew your licence you get to
renew your objections.

consenting adults, BTW. no implied consent with opt out for minors
in my world

I agree.

[Trinka]

And before you ask, yes, I am already an organ donor. But that was my free choice.

Same here...free choice...

[zantax]

Which means it's not mandatory.

Yet, having health insurance isn't mandatory yet either.

[kenpoman]

can't help but wonder:

with the rampant homohysteria going on here lately,
are any of the faux objections fear of gay organs?

get a new kidney, start batting for the other team

[mpodlesny]

yet another faux outrage thread.

will all the issues we face, folks insist on wallowing
in idiocy like this.

and then seem to genuinely wonder why the GOP
is irrevellant nationally
yet you find the time to comment on this "wallowing idiocy"

but of course you would think this is a non issue, because in your liberal mind others make decision for you so this is normal for your thought process.

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

yet you find the time to comment on this "wallowing idiocy"

but of course you would think this is a non issue, because in your liberal mind others make decision for you so this is normal for your thought process.
Ken. Liberal.

ROFLMAO!!!

:))

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

Yet, having health insurance isn't mandatory yet either.

And he builds another strawman.

:lol:

[kenpoman]

yet you find the time to comment on this "wallowing idiocy"

but of course you would think this is a non issue, because in your liberal mind others make decision for you so this is normal for your thought process.

not confronting idiocy when its dangerous is to imply its got
a valid point.

if more folks had confronted the idiocy of the Obama experience we
might not have gotten stuck with him.

[kenpoman]

Ken. Liberal.

ROFLMAO!!!

:))

I get that alot these days.

seems since I
acknowlege Obama as the legally elected POTUS,
(don't like it, but we did have a vote)

think that all Americans regardless of sexual orientation deserve
equal treatment under the law,
(gays are people - who knew)

think the talk of secession is stupid beyond belief
(myself, I support expelling Texas from the union and giving it back to Mexico)

support a woman's right to choose
(even though I almost always disagree with the abortion option)

I seem to have been booted out of the VRWC.

[kenpoman]

And he builds another strawman.

:lol:

the first one is in smoking ruin

[Impenitent]

back door to "donated" stem cells

[HeadOnStraight]

Shouldn't the government force people to "donate" their organs upon death? I mean, it's obvious they won't be needing them, that it's for the greater good and would save many thousands of lives. Aren't we our brother's keeper and isn't it a moral imperative to save as many lives as possible? Seems like a perfect fit for this administration and current congress to me.

Of course it's destructive of personal liberty and has huge potential for abuse but so what? That's not stopping them from pushing very similar ideas in regard to individuals giving up personal liberty in the name of the greater collective good. Of course I'm against it as I believe personal liberty trumps even the obvious benefits of saving so many lives, but then again, I am a selfish conservative republican. I think it illustrates pretty well the main argument between the right and the left, whether or not government should have the power to force people to "do the right thing" for the greater good or not. And it's a very unambiguous issue in terms of whether or not it would be beneficial, unlike cap and trade or universal healthcare. So I don't expect any liberals to come into the thread and oppose the idea, at least not if they want to lay claim to any semblance of internal logical consistency.
Mandated exercise should be enforced also, this would keep health care costs down, and ensure harvests of healthier organs.

[rjhambone]

Shouldn't the government force people to "donate" their organs upon death? I mean, it's obvious they won't be needing them, that it's for the greater good and would save many thousands of lives. Aren't we our brother's keeper and isn't it a moral imperative to save as many lives as possible? Seems like a perfect fit for this administration and current congress to me.

Of course it's destructive of personal liberty and has huge potential for abuse but so what? That's not stopping them from pushing very similar ideas in regard to individuals giving up personal liberty in the name of the greater collective good. Of course I'm against it as I believe personal liberty trumps even the obvious benefits of saving so many lives, but then again, I am a selfish conservative republican. I think it illustrates pretty well the main argument between the right and the left, whether or not government should have the power to force people to "do the right thing" for the greater good or not. And it's a very unambiguous issue in terms of whether or not it would be beneficial, unlike cap and trade or universal healthcare. So I don't expect any liberals to come into the thread and oppose the idea, at least not if they want to lay claim to any semblance of internal logical consistency.

I am a voluntary donor, and no, this should not be mandatory. Also, consider that some religions and sects would fight this tooth and nail. My dead body remains my business...for now at least.

[zantax]

Here's the argument from proponents of mandatory donations, now am I off base in saying it closely resembles progressives arguments for any number of other items on their agenda? You decide..

from http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/cgi/content/full/2/2/300

One of the major reasons for insisting on consent is to show respect for autonomy, a major principle of biomedical ethics. However, Beauchamp and Childress (12 (http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/cgi/content/full/2/2/300#R12)) pointed out that as important as this principle is, it "has only prima facie standing and can be overridden by competing moral considerations." One such consideration occurs when society is so invested in attaining a certain goal that is designed to promote the public good that it mandates its citizens to behave in a manner that increases the probability of achieving that goal, even though many of them would prefer not to act in this way. Silver (13 (http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/cgi/content/full/2/2/300#R13)) pointed out the legitimacy of this approach in his discussion of an "organ draft": "The sense behind the coercive power of democratic governments is to move society forward by public decree where individuals will not, by private volition, act in their own best interests." Examples of such situations include a military draft during wartime, taxation, mandatory vaccination of children who attend public school, jury duty, and, perhaps most relevant to routine removal of cadaveric organs, mandatory autopsy when foul play is suspected. Although some people may not like the fact that they have no choice about these programs, the vast majority of us accept their existence as necessary to promote the common good. Routine removal of cadaveric organs would be consistent with this established approach, and it would save many lives at no more (and we believe much less) cost than these other mandated programs. Furthermore, had we been born into a world where cadaveric organ removal for transplantation were routine, it is likely that few if any people would question the policy, just as few of us question mandatory autopsy today. And while most of us will never need a transplant, nonrecipients would also benefit from the plan in the same way that people who never file a claim benefit from the security of having insurance. It should also be noted here that, as discussed below, a person’s autonomy is lost after death.

[zantax]

Mandated exercise should be enforced also, this would keep health care costs down, and ensure harvests of healthier organs.

What do you think the end result of the government ending up the last health insurer standing will be? Seems logical to me that they would end up saying something like, you aren't covered for knee surgery if you refuse to follow your doctors advice on diet and exercise, in fact isn't it already happening in other cointries with national health care coverage? Why yes, it is.

And if you think the government won't be the only insurer left you should have watched Obama's speech yesterday where he said that there needs to be competition from the government in health insurance and also said it would be non-profit, then ask yourself, how does a for profit company effectively compete with a non-profit insurer? And that's if you're willing to believe it won't be propped up by government subsidy to begin with.

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

I get that alot these days.

seems since I
acknowlege Obama as the legally elected POTUS,
(don't like it, but we did have a vote)

think that all Americans regardless of sexual orientation deserve
equal treatment under the law,
(gays are people - who knew)

think the talk of secession is stupid beyond belief
(myself, I support expelling Texas from the union and giving it back to Mexico)

support a woman's right to choose
(even though I almost always disagree with the abortion option)

I seem to have been booted out of the VRWC.
Well come on over.

We have cookies!!!!

[kenpoman]

Well come on over.

We have cookies!!!!

oooh!
what a thing to say to a diabetic.

now red meat? that's anther story. start up the grill!
(yes, I know, its got its own set of problems, but ...)

[harumph]

I spoke about this very thing with a friend in the medical field. I asked if they would go the extra mile to keep me alive if they knew I was a donor, and he said, No, they probably wouldn't. Now, that's if they knew I was a donor.

Now, consider if organ donation was mandatory.

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

oooh!
what a thing to say to a diabetic.

now red meat? that's anther story. start up the grill!
(yes, I know, its got its own set of problems, but ...)

We'll grill and THEN have cookies!

Woot!

[zantax]

I get that alot these days.

seems since I
acknowlege Obama as the legally elected POTUS,
(don't like it, but we did have a vote)

think that all Americans regardless of sexual orientation deserve
equal treatment under the law,
(gays are people - who knew)

think the talk of secession is stupid beyond belief
(myself, I support expelling Texas from the union and giving it back to Mexico)

support a woman's right to choose
(even though I almost always disagree with the abortion option)

I seem to have been booted out of the VRWC.

I can't speak for all republicans but I welcome your vote for conservative candidates no matter what your personal views are.

[harumph]

Originally Posted by kenpoman http://forums.hannity.com/firestorm/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?p=57122641#post57122641)
I get that alot these days.

seems since I
acknowlege Obama as the legally elected POTUS,
(don't like it, but we did have a vote)

think that all Americans regardless of sexual orientation deserve
equal treatment under the law,
(gays are people - who knew)

think the talk of secession is stupid beyond belief
(myself, I support expelling Texas from the union and giving it back to Mexico)

support a woman's right to choose
(even though I almost always disagree with the abortion option)

I seem to have been booted out of the VRWC.


Conservatives, Republicans, Fence-sitters, democrats and liberals are all welcome to vote for a fiscally-responsible, intelligent, conservative candidate. Are these points you mentioned above, the sticking points for you?

[less right]

First, I am a voluntary organ donor (as long as I'm really done with it :) ). I don't get why people wouldn't want to be donors (sans religious reasons). Second, I don't think the government should be able to mandate organ donation.

But this argument...
What a bizarre world view. So no one should mind the government making mandatory anything they already do voluntarily? I already go to work, why would I mind it being mandatory? I already volunteer at my local church, why would I mind it being mandatory? I already watch Fox and Friends in the morning, why should I mind it being mandatory?...sounds like the "if you have nothing to hide" argument. Which also holds no water for real freedom loving people.

[Mohawk5]

If you're dead what do you need it for?

[Bluesgtr44]

First, I am a voluntary organ donor (as long as I'm really done with it :) ). I don't get why people wouldn't want to be donors (sans religious reasons). Second, I don't think the government should be able to mandate organ donation.

But this argument...
...sounds like the "if you have nothing to hide" argument. Which also holds no water for real freedom loving people.

I am NOT an organ donor. I knew of a fellow worker who's child needed a transplant and they were waiting for a donor. Other fellow workers got together and held a picnic that asked for a donation to attend and it was to help with the medical bills that would ensue when a transplant took place with this child.......I was thrown back a bit......I thought this was a "donor" situation.....through and through.

No, it's not....the only donor is the organ donor.....who just died and that family just might need a little financial assistance themselves. Why are all the "players" making their money, but some folks who may be just as needy at a time when they lost a loved one and quite possibly a major income earner for the family......gets squat! I had a problem with this scenario and still can't get a grasp on the "donor" aspect if the only thing "donated".....is from the dead person.

This fellow workers child did get the organ transplant and I did attend the picnic, but I choose not to be an organ donor because I don't much like the way the system is stacked! How about a little picnic to get a little money together for the family who lost a loved one? They just may need a little help themselves.......

[less right]

I am NOT an organ donor. I knew of a fellow worker who's child needed a transplant and they were waiting for a donor. Other fellow workers got together and held a picnic that asked for a donation to attend and it was to help with the medical bills that would ensue when a transplant took place with this child.......I was thrown back a bit......I thought this was a "donor" situation.....through and through.

No, it's not....the only donor is the organ donor.....who just died and that family just might need a little financial assistance themselves. Why are all the "players" making their money, but some folks who may be just as needy at a time when they lost a loved one and quite possibly a major income earner for the family......gets squat! I had a problem with this scenario and still can't get a grasp on the "donor" aspect if the only thing "donated".....is from the dead person.

This fellow workers child did get the organ transplant and I did attend the picnic, but I choose not to be an organ donor because I don't much like the way the system is stacked! How about a little picnic to get a little money together for the family who lost a loved one? They just may need a little help themselves.......

Your right, and collections can and are made to families who have lost loved ones. As a side note, I bet part of the cost put upon the 'receiving' family is the cost of harvesting the organs.

Only speaking for myself, I never had any notion that my donation was part of a larger 'donation process'. I've never known any part of the healthcare system that didn't charge handsomely for their services -- regardless of circumstances.

However, imagine if family members stand to gain financially from your organs. You may become worth more dead then alive and depending are who stands to gain, that's an incentive that some should not have. I believe that's why it's illegal to buy/sell organs.

I always want to be worth more to my "loved ones" alive then dead. :)

[Libstomper]

Shouldn't the government force people to "donate" their organs upon death? I mean, it's obvious they won't be needing them, that it's for the greater good and would save many thousands of lives. Aren't we our brother's keeper and isn't it a moral imperative to save as many lives as possible? Seems like a perfect fit for this administration and current congress to me.

Of course it's destructive of personal liberty and has huge potential for abuse but so what? That's not stopping them from pushing very similar ideas in regard to individuals giving up personal liberty in the name of the greater collective good. Of course I'm against it as I believe personal liberty trumps even the obvious benefits of saving so many lives, but then again, I am a selfish conservative republican. I think it illustrates pretty well the main argument between the right and the left, whether or not government should have the power to force people to "do the right thing" for the greater good or not. And it's a very unambiguous issue in terms of whether or not it would be beneficial, unlike cap and trade or universal healthcare. So I don't expect any liberals to come into the thread and oppose the idea, at least not if they want to lay claim to any semblance of internal logical consistency.

Heck, why not just have the US do it, why not the whole world. They could employ international harvesters.

[mrsc696]

This whole thread is a waste of time under universal health care there won't be any organ transplants. Plus the anti rejection medicine will be to costly and be eliminated. Just FYI!

[Gabby]

I don't see why anyone wouldn't be an organ donor. What the hell do you need them for?
Not everyone can donate organs.. some people have things that could harm anyone who got their organs.

In the end it's a personal choice and should remain that way. People have their reasons and do not need to explain it to anyone.