A just society ought to presume consent for organ procurement from the deceased.

DEFINITIONS & ASSOCIATIONS:Just society: A just society would be a society based on the rule of law. This society would be based on the recognition, practice, and enforcement of laws. Therefore is something is legal, it is just. Just[1]:"2b. legally correct"Society[2]: "3b. a community, nation, or broad grouping of people having common traditions, institutions, and collective activities and interests"[1]. http://www.merriam-webster.com...[2]http://www.merriam-webster.com...Presumed consent: Presumed consent would be the expectation that something would be approved of. Presumed[3]:"to expect or assume especially with confidence"Consent[4]:"to give assent or approval"[3]. http://www.merriam-webster.com...[4]http://www.merriam-webster.com...Organ procurement: Organ procurement would be when an organ is removed from a person. Organ[5]:"2a. a differentiated structure (as a heart, kidney, leaf, or stem) consisting of cells and tissues and performing some specific function in an organism"Procure[6]: "1a. obtain by particular care and effort"[5]. http://www.merriam-webster.com...[6]http://www.merriam-webster.com...INTRODUCTION:(A) It is of the utmost importance for us to understand why this debate is even notable. There aren't enough organ donors currently available. According to the New York Donor Network over a 120,000 people are waiting for organ transplants[7]. Every 10 minutes another person is added to this long list. Organ Procurement may help in narrowing down this wait list. [7]. http://www.donatelifeny.org...;PREMISES:(B) How a presume consent program would functionThe organ procurement in this debate related to the deceased is a voluntary agreement between those in the program who died and those who control the program(I. e, the state) in theory. In practice, orgran procurement would apply to most individuals in society since it would be a default program that all people would be entered in when their born[8]. Someone could opt out of the program if they wish. [8]. http://www.hks.harvard.edu...ARGUMENTS:(1) Presume Consent Would be OptionalIf someone wants to opt out of organ procurement,they can easily do it anytime before their deaths. A minor flaw would be if someone unexpectedly was shot, hit by a car, or any other unexpected death that a person can't prepare for. (2)Extend More LivesOrgan Procurement would allow more people to live due to organ transplants. (3) Organ Procurement has been SuccessfulOrgan procurement programs in countries that have such default programs have been studied and proven far more successful than countries without such programs. For example, a regressive analysis was conducted at Harvard which compared countries that had organ procurement programs and those without such programs. Specifically, their study, inquired about cadaveric donors[8]. Countries with organ procurement on average had 17 million donors. While countries without organ procurement programs had 3 million donors. Clearly this indicates the success of organ procurement. In a practical sense, it is far better to have an organ procurement program for the deceased than not to have one. QUERY(1A)The Dead Have No Need For Their OrgansI would ask my opponent does he agree, "the dead have no need for their organs? " This is merely a query. This is a practical question irrelevant to the resolution since it relates to legality.