Organ donation should be 'opt out' as opposed to 'opt in'

The MajorityWhile point of what you have said are true, we do not live in a true democracy, and we do legislate for the minority, I will explain abit more what I mean with this. I for example am Scottish. When you say "The most popular political party are voted in because the greatest proportion of the population support them", this doesn't seem true to me. Out of all the seats going in the last election, conservatives got 1 seat in Scotland, not a majority. Scotland is currently ruled over by a conservative prime minister based on that election. So even with your own example, votes do not transend to the end result quite as clearly as you have mentioned. We also vote on parties, not on every individual change. A true democracy would put all big decicions like this to a vote, and in that case, yes the majority would decide. However we do not. Parties make general promises, they get voted in, and some of those promises are kept. They may very well go back o some though. You could vote on a party to change things to opt-out, and they could leave it the same. In terms of legislating for the minority though, I did not mean that the minority get their way. What I was saying is that we legislate ti protect the monority. Take free speech laws for example. .. We have rules in place so that people can have their view heard. Why do we do this if it was for th emajority? If it was for the majority, we wouldn't need laws, it would be what most people think and would therefore not be any issue to people. We legislate to protect free speech so that the minority may have their say, however unpopular it is what they are saying, they still have a right to it. Even if only 1% of people wanted to speak out against something, freedom of speech is there for them to do so. There, for the sake of protecting the minority. In the same sense, we should protect the minorities of this country just as much as majorities, and that is why I was saying it should not matter what the percentage of athiests to muslims to christians is. It should make no difference because we do not legislate for the majority, we do it to protect the smaller groups. Determining The Religion & Alternative OptionsI notice than Pro has missed out a responce to the point of determining religion, even though it was brought up in the very first round. I put it forward again however, If you cannot tell what religion a person is, how can you possibly make sure that you are abiding by that religions laws surrounding organ donation? If a jew, a christian, an athiest, and a muslim all pass away on the same day, how can you tell? We cannot go on looks, since each religions followers can vary in looks as much as the next one. We cannot even go on tattoo's for they may have had a change of religion. Some people feel uneasy telling friends or family when they first convert, especially if they are in a social circle of a different religion, or a family that is all of a different religion. So even if we ask family members, how could we be sure? You couldn't even go on church attentance etc. because someone could have a lifechanging moment at any point in their day, month or year. It could be a spontanious thing 2 seconds before walking out the door, and before they get a chance to tell the world about this new found part of their life something may happen. If you cannot be 100% sure of someones religion when they come in, then no matter what alternative options you put forward, they won't work if the person can't tell you their specific religion. The only way to get this definitive proof that their religios beliefs make it ok for them to donate is if they tell you, and by essence, this would be opting in, the exact same way the system already works right now. So as stated, unless you can 100% prove every persons religion in the uk withought having to ask them personally, there's now ay you can have an assumed opt-in without crossing someones religios beliefs or practices and possibly condemming them to an eternal hell. Honouring of personal opinionsWhile Pro states that opt-in and opt-out systems would equally insult either side, I disagree, and will explain why. Our body is our own personal property. It is not insulting to say "If you would like to, you can give us access to your body so that you can help save peoples lifes. " However it is insulting to say "We are going to assume we have permission to access body parts without any given consent unless you tell us otherwise". ReligionPro says "In the case of Muslims only being able to donate if it's going to save a life, that is surely a personal decision they must make. It also depends on what you define as 'saving a life. '". . "All organ donations, one way or another, save a life, depending on your definition of the term. "This just highlights a point of mine. Muslims have a specific set of ways to determine what is life saving and what is not, and when it is ok for them to donate. It is important to them because if they donate without it being to dirctly save a life they are violating Muslim rules directly. Again though, theres no way you would know if someone personally identifies with being muslim unless asking them. Family and friends could easily be in error. Mixing Of PaperworkI have to disagree. If your organs are not donated, yes I could see this not being what you wanted, and I'm sure you would feel passionate and probably angered that they haven't been put to the use for which you intended them, but nothing has changed, the just havent went through with an act that you gave permission for. They arent saying they defnitly will, your just saying "if there is still a waiting list and you need them, please feel free to do so. " Who knows, the might develop a magic healing machine by then, By not taking you up on the offer you are not losing out on anything, especially if there is no demand. .However on the flip side, Someone not wanting to donate their organs is having those wishes completely negated in this case, which is a much worse fate. They are having parts of their person removed against will and beliefs and that cannot be undone. It causes harm directly to the wishes of that person in an un fixable way and if their belief is correct, might even be the diciding factor in whether this person gets into heavan or has an eternity of torture in hell. the latter is a worse fate. ConclusionPro has not stated anyway to properly determine of what religion you are, without help directly. This is a fundamental reason against the opt-out system and shows that it would be flawed. Many thanks to Con, good debate!