Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page 1, 2  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  

If I get into a deadly crash (currently) I _____ my organs to be used in someone else.
would not allow
12%
 12%  [ 2 ]
would allow
68%
 68%  [ 11 ]
I have not decided yet
18%
 18%  [ 3 ]
Total Votes : 16

Author Message
Rusty Bedsprings





Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 1629

votes: 5

PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:30 pm    Post subject: Organs, for me and you? Reply with quote

If you have gotten a licence to drive you will have answered the question on if you will allow your organs to be used in someone else if you are in a deadly crash. What did you say, I know I won't need them when I am dead but I still put no. I feel squeamish about my body not being all in one place after death, what do you think about the subject?
darkstorme





Joined: 10 Dec 2008
Posts: 18
Reputation: 21.6Reputation: 21.6

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's a personal decision, of course, but consider. If you sign up to be an organ donor, then if you happen to die, a number of other people get to live who might not otherwise do so.

If you don't... you've condemned those individuals to die because you feel "squeamish".

If my brain has been destroyed, there isn't any "me" anymore to use my organs, so I don't feel particularly bad about their distribution to people in need. It might even save burial costs by allowing me to fit into a smaller urn! ;)
fiscalconservative





Joined: 08 Dec 2008
Posts: 1043
Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9
votes: 6

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:42 am    Post subject: Re: Organs, for me and you? Reply with quote

Rusty Bedsprings wrote:
If you have gotten a licence to drive you will have answered the question on if you will allow your organs to be used in someone else if you are in a deadly crash. What did you say, I know I won't need them when I am dead but I still put no. I feel squeamish about my body not being all in one place after death, what do you think about the subject?


I think the bigger question is, should you have to opt into having your organs taken (as it is now), or have to opt out (they take them by default). Personally, I think it should be the later with everyone dying on the transplant lists.
crazymamma





Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 1011
Reputation: 71.8
votes: 14
Location: The kitchen

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:10 am    Post subject: Re: Organs, for me and you? Reply with quote

fiscalconservative wrote:
Rusty Bedsprings wrote:
If you have gotten a licence to drive you will have answered the question on if you will allow your organs to be used in someone else if you are in a deadly crash. What did you say, I know I won't need them when I am dead but I still put no. I feel squeamish about my body not being all in one place after death, what do you think about the subject?


I think the bigger question is, should you have to opt into having your organs taken (as it is now), or have to opt out (they take them by default). Personally, I think it should be the later with everyone dying on the transplant lists.


WTF?

I just want to make this perfectly clear: I have signed my donor card. I'm all up for a little slice and dice, thus allowing someone else live a more productive life and avoiding a dirt nap prematurely, but still WTF on the "you have to negative bill yourself to opt out"?

A person at the very least has a right to own their own body and decide to what they wish to do with their remains. There are many reasons, rational and irrational, some religious, why a person and their family may not wish to donate their organs. For this to be an opt out you are putting the burden on folks to allllllways have some sort of government ID/documentation on them stating their RIGHT not to donate.

Scenario: A woman is in a car accident, her purse with all the appropriate Government issued documents gets thrown from the car. Is anyone going to search the bush to find her purse? What if someone has stolen it? What if you are a Jane/john doe? This is really a very bad idea in my opinion.

You and I think it is important but that does not give us the right to force others to have to jump thru hoops to opt out. No one ""owes" anybody their body parts. Period.
Bleatmop





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 953
Reputation: 17.5Reputation: 17.5
votes: 10

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:51 pm    Post subject: Re: Organs, for me and you? Reply with quote

crazymamma wrote:
fiscalconservative wrote:
Rusty Bedsprings wrote:
If you have gotten a licence to drive you will have answered the question on if you will allow your organs to be used in someone else if you are in a deadly crash. What did you say, I know I won't need them when I am dead but I still put no. I feel squeamish about my body not being all in one place after death, what do you think about the subject?


I think the bigger question is, should you have to opt into having your organs taken (as it is now), or have to opt out (they take them by default). Personally, I think it should be the later with everyone dying on the transplant lists.


WTF?

I just want to make this perfectly clear: I have signed my donor card. I'm all up for a little slice and dice, thus allowing someone else live a more productive life and avoiding a dirt nap prematurely, but still WTF on the "you have to negative bill yourself to opt out"?

A person at the very least has a right to own their own body and decide to what they wish to do with their remains. There are many reasons, rational and irrational, some religious, why a person and their family may not wish to donate their organs. For this to be an opt out you are putting the burden on folks to allllllways have some sort of government ID/documentation on them stating their RIGHT not to donate.

Scenario: A woman is in a car accident, her purse with all the appropriate Government issued documents gets thrown from the car. Is anyone going to search the bush to find her purse? What if someone has stolen it? What if you are a Jane/john doe? This is really a very bad idea in my opinion.

You and I think it is important but that does not give us the right to force others to have to jump thru hoops to opt out. No one ""owes" anybody their body parts. Period.


Who suggested anyone owes anyone their body parts? As far as your scenario goes, I think that could be easily rectified. First, there is a move of portable electronic medical records and in the near future your health record will be accessible in all emergency rooms. If you have any ID on you, then they would be able to see on your record your wish not to organ donate. Second, make the consent legislation so that John or Jane Does are non-consenting. That seems like it would solve any concerns to me.
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bleatmop,

I'll tell you right now that you have far, far too much faith in government health facilities, and even staff. You need to know that the potential for organ donation *will* change your treatment plan in marginal cases, with a view to preserving your organs. To follow the 'opt-out' regime would be to potentially put your life in the hands of another, vulnerable to the whims of unknown doctors, government bureaucracies, and the follies of humans and the system they design, to a much greater extent than necessary. I for one, will not cede any input into my treatment to a government database.

Beyond that point, presuming consent to donation is more than a presumption that you owe others your organs. It is a presumption of collective ownership of your body, a presumption that while your body is mostly your own, it is not entirely your own. There a great many other solutions to increasing the donor pool that do not require partial state ownership of my body.
Rusty Bedsprings





Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 1629

votes: 5

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

fiscal con wrote:
Quote:
I think the bigger question is, should you have to opt into having your organs taken (as it is now), or have to opt out (they take them by default). Personally, I think it should be the later with everyone dying on the transplant lists.


Shouldn't people have a right to control their own bodies? even after death, or are you against abortion too?
fiscalconservative





Joined: 08 Dec 2008
Posts: 1043
Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9
votes: 6

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rusty Bedsprings wrote:
fiscal con wrote:
Quote:
I think the bigger question is, should you have to opt into having your organs taken (as it is now), or have to opt out (they take them by default). Personally, I think it should be the later with everyone dying on the transplant lists.


Shouldn't people have a right to control their own bodies? even after death, or are you against abortion too?


People should have a right to control their own bodies, and I can respect that. What I am saying is that if you ask the majority of the population "If you were killed in an accident, would you want your organs to save someones life" they would probably say yes.
At the same time, a majority of them have not signed their donor card. People are dying right left and center because of a lack of organs.

If your religious views preclude you from donating an organ, thats you choice.
Its like vegetarians. Most banquets and stuff I have gone to will serve a vegetarian meal if asked, but they would serve it by default.
Ryulink





Joined: 12 Nov 2008
Posts: 36
Reputation: 5.4Reputation: 5.4Reputation: 5.4Reputation: 5.4Reputation: 5.4
Location: Montréal

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some people are just too lazy to sign their card. It should be if you dont want to give organs, you sign.
darkstorme





Joined: 10 Dec 2008
Posts: 18
Reputation: 21.6Reputation: 21.6

PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ryulink wrote:
Some people are just too lazy to sign their card. It should be if you dont want to give organs, you sign.


That was, in fact, the point fiscalconservative was making. As with many sign-up forms on the internet, you'd have to consciously opt OUT of donation. The idea suggested above by Bleatmop, that John and Jane Does be exempted from this automatic donation list, seems to handle any border cases, and seems just fine to me.

Additionally, having to consciously decide not to donate one's organs might force contemplation of what a selfish act signing that card is. Whether or not you believe in an afterlife, in either case you're not going to be needing your organs anymore. It's like burning your old-but-wearable clothes, rather than letting them be donated to a charity. There's no good reason for it but spite.

Jehova's Witnesses do not believe in receiving blood transfusions, save autologous transfusion, but nothing in their doctrine says that organ donation is verboten, nor the reception of donated organs. (Though one hopes they had a supply of frozen blood put aside for that occasion, or the surgeon on duty is in for a heck of a challenge.) Many religions, in fact, encourage donation. Barring extremely unusual circumstances (there were, as of the last census, for example, 445 Shinto practitioners in Canada), religion shouldn't be grounds for objection to donation, but rather as incentive!

If you knew something that you did not wish everyone to know but that nonetheless made your organs unfit for donation (eg. HIV positive), I could understand that being a concern...

But other than that, it truly does seem selfish to say "no".
crazymamma





Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 1011
Reputation: 71.8
votes: 14
Location: The kitchen

PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello....Hello....hello is this thing on?....Am I at the Blogging TORIES? or at the state owns your cadaver site?

This is an absurd assumption .

All persons in the world have blood and we let folks die due to lack of blood, plasma, proper bone marrow match every freaking day of the year. Yet some how we have managed not to force/grab folks off the street to donate. It is not your decision to decide what I must do or not do. It's not your place to use the government to assert/enforce your wishes. It is not your place to decide that anyone is being selfish with a valuable resource that they have ownership over.

Do you buy the idea that it is selfish to not give over almost all your paychecks to those that neeeed it? Do you know that folks die on the waiting lists for a freaking MRI, A year wait in Ottawa. disease metastasize and become terminal while you go out to super/movie with your wife, family? Selfish, selfish, selfish .How dare you deny them the money for that diagnostic equipment. Your responsible for real deaths.

Do you know that folks die every day because they cannot afford to pay for their prescriptions? What are you doing....hand over your money and so folks will stop dying left right and center.

PLEEEEASSSSSEEEE..............

Funny how folks are all about the "'make them do it because I like the cause and lordy knows only reasonable folks think exactly like me and my friends" . :roll:
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ryulink wrote:
Some people are just too lazy to sign their card. It should be if you dont want to give organs, you sign.

Reverse onus never works... and I'm not sure that's a power we want to give to governments.

-Mac
fiscalconservative





Joined: 08 Dec 2008
Posts: 1043
Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9Reputation: 49.9
votes: 6

PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

crazymamma wrote:
Hello....Hello....hello is this thing on?....Am I at the Blogging TORIES? or at the state owns your cadaver site?

This is an absurd assumption .

All persons in the world have blood and we let folks die due to lack of blood, plasma, proper bone marrow match every freaking day of the year. Yet some how we have managed not to force/grab folks off the street to donate. It is not your decision to decide what I must do or not do. It's not your place to use the government to assert/enforce your wishes. It is not your place to decide that anyone is being selfish with a valuable resource that they have ownership over.

Do you buy the idea that it is selfish to not give over almost all your paychecks to those that neeeed it? Do you know that folks die on the waiting lists for a freaking MRI, A year wait in Ottawa. disease metastasize and become terminal while you go out to super/movie with your wife, family? Selfish, selfish, selfish .How dare you deny them the money for that diagnostic equipment. Your responsible for real deaths.

Do you know that folks die every day because they cannot afford to pay for their prescriptions? What are you doing....hand over your money and so folks will stop dying left right and center.

PLEEEEASSSSSEEEE..............

Funny how folks are all about the "'make them do it because I like the cause and lordy knows only reasonable folks think exactly like me and my friends" . :roll:


I don't think your paycheque analogy works. I value my pay check - I don't value my corpse. Seriously, what do you intend to do with your corpse anyway ? Come back as a zombie ?I think only people who have really contemplated the choice have old crappy organs anway.

I think the better perscription here would be to make the individual ask answer the question - yes or no when they renew their drivers license. That would keep the small minority of people who value their dead body happy, while saving lives.
crazymamma





Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 1011
Reputation: 71.8
votes: 14
Location: The kitchen

PostPosted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fiscalconservative wrote:
crazymamma wrote:
Hello....Hello....hello is this thing on?....Am I at the Blogging TORIES? or at the state owns your cadaver site?

This is an absurd assumption .

All persons in the world have blood and we let folks die due to lack of blood, plasma, proper bone marrow match every freaking day of the year. Yet some how we have managed not to force/grab folks off the street to donate. It is not your decision to decide what I must do or not do. It's not your place to use the government to assert/enforce your wishes. It is not your place to decide that anyone is being selfish with a valuable resource that they have ownership over.

Do you buy the idea that it is selfish to not give over almost all your paychecks to those that neeeed it? Do you know that folks die on the waiting lists for a freaking MRI, A year wait in Ottawa. disease metastasize and become terminal while you go out to super/movie with your wife, family? Selfish, selfish, selfish .How dare you deny them the money for that diagnostic equipment. Your responsible for real deaths.

Do you know that folks die every day because they cannot afford to pay for their prescriptions? What are you doing....hand over your money and so folks will stop dying left right and center.

PLEEEEASSSSSEEEE..............

Funny how folks are all about the "'make them do it because I like the cause and lordy knows only reasonable folks think exactly like me and my friends" . :roll:


I don't think your paycheque analogy works.


Of course it does.

Quote:
I value my pay check


I also value your paycheque and I think I can spend it better then you can on stuff that I think is important, you'd only be wasting it anyway..who cares what you think I want to give it to others. How can you be soooo selfish?

Quote:
I don't value my corpse.
So that makes you the arbitrator of what is tasteful in corpse usage for everyone in Canada?????? It's really none of your business what folks do when they are dead, (that was just the silliest sentence I have ever typed in my life.) What right have you to cast your moralistic covetous eyes on anyone else's cadaver?



The very fact that a person would think to force ANYONE to seek Permission from the Powers that be to do with what they want with their own dead body is ludicrous infringement of the state on a person..Are you sure your a Conservative? Sounds to me that you are a collectivist, I know whats best for everyone, at heart.
Rusty Bedsprings





Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 1629

votes: 5

PostPosted: Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

crazymama wrote:
Quote:
Hello....Hello....hello is this thing on?....Am I at the Blogging TORIES? or at the state owns your cadaver site?

This is an absurd assumption .

All persons in the world have blood and we let folks die due to lack of blood, plasma, proper bone marrow match every freaking day of the year. Yet some how we have managed not to force/grab folks off the street to donate. It is not your decision to decide what I must do or not do. It's not your place to use the government to assert/enforce your wishes. It is not your place to decide that anyone is being selfish with a valuable resource that they have ownership over.

Do you buy the idea that it is selfish to not give over almost all your paychecks to those that neeeed it? Do you know that folks die on the waiting lists for a freaking MRI, A year wait in Ottawa. disease metastasize and become terminal while you go out to super/movie with your wife, family? Selfish, selfish, selfish .How dare you deny them the money for that diagnostic equipment. Your responsible for real deaths.

Do you know that folks die every day because they cannot afford to pay for their prescriptions? What are you doing....hand over your money and so folks will stop dying left right and center.

PLEEEEASSSSSEEEE..............

Funny how folks are all about the "'make them do it because I like the cause and lordy knows only reasonable folks think exactly like me and my friends" .



Very good points.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2

Goto page 1, 2  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Organs, for me and you?

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB