From: ARCHER@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: interesting [and scary] blurb...
Organization: University of Tennessee 
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 22:19:38 GMT

In article <1hu3jkINNj7k@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brandon D. Ray) writes:
>In a previous article, lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani) says:
>
>>In article <1992Dec30.184941.6791@mksol.dseg.ti.com> noonan@mksol.dseg.ti.com (Michael P Noonan) writes:
>>>How can anyone sit here and say, "I don't want so-and-so to have my
>>>organs because I don't agree with his political views."
>>
>>I don't see why you think this is so unreasonable.  If someone has spent
>>so much of their life working towards their values and dreams why would
>>they want to help someone with the opposive values and dreams ?
>>
>>It would cause me great distress, today, that someone who was opposed
>>to my ideals of person freedom and liberty could ever get their facist
>>paws on my organs.  Let them die in agony, I say.  Why should I be party
>>to their continued attacks on the freedom and liberty of my friends and
>>family after my organs are in their body and they are healthy again ?
>>
>>Why the hell would I want to do that ?
>>
>Because you realize that we are all human, and vulnerable, and that at botoom
>we have more in common than we have keeping us apart?  Because you value 
>human life more than petty politics?

Interesting that you should call politics "petty."  There are many people 
who feel that thier ideals are worth dying for.

>>>I am personally disgusted that someone could have the potential to be
>>>so selfish to not share something of which they have no need.
>>
>>Be disgusted; you won't get my organs either.
>>
>That's very grown-up and considered of you, I am sure.

The relative maturity of organ donors and civil liberties violators is not 
germane.  This issue is one of control, and who should control your body:  
you, or the state.

>>
>>I am not an altruist.
>>
>That is obvious.

Altruism and libertarianism are not mutually exclusive.  It is not obvious 
at all.

>>
>>Why is it so hard to comprehend that some people
>>feel strongly about their values and dreams ?
>>
>It isn't; it is just always something of a shock to find someone whose
>values and dreams are so odious as yours appear to be.

Odious is relative.  I find the idea that control of my body reverts to the 
state to be odious to the extreme.

>>
>>If you have no values and dreams, well, fine, give your kidney
>>to Jeffery Dahmer.  Actualy, don't he'll just eat it.
>>
>If he needs it, I will.  He is a human being, no matter what crimes he has
>committed.  

That he is human is irrelivant to whether or not he needs or deserves an 
organ, except in the practical sense of whether or not he can use it.  He is 
not "entitled" to one, by the virtue of his humanity.  No one is ENTITLED to 
an organ.

>> 
>>>Everyone should be a donor.  It shouldn't even be a question.
>>
>>Sure it should.  Some people have a religous objection to it, perhaps
>>their God doesn't approve of mutilation.  Some people, mostly women,
>>don't want to donate those organs which would result in disfiguration.
>>Some people are just bothered a great deal about the idea of having
>>their guts ripped out, even after they are dead.  Not a pleasant thought.
>>
>Which is why people should be allowed to say no.  But that doesn't mean that
>they should not be encouraged to say yes.

The state is welcme to encourage all it wants.  But changing the default to "
is an organ donor" is not encouragement, it is coercion, and an unacceptable 
infringement on personal liberty.

[snip]

>I work with medical students and medical residents on a daily basis.  I have
>a very clear idea of what uses human cadavers are put to.  It doesn't bother
>me.  I have no use for my body once I am dead.  Why should I care what happens
>to it?

If you don't care, that's fine.  I care.  My body will be of use to me.  I'm 
going to donate my organs.

>>My "trust" is a legal person, and has the legal right to dispose of
>>property and other assets.  I don't see an issue with having my "trust"
>>dispose of my corpse per my instructions.
>>
>Well, that "right" is already severely circumscribed.  You cannot, for example,
>have your body dumped in the river, or chopped up and fed to the starving
>children in the neighborhood (oh...I forgot...you are not a humanitarian,
>so that example would not apply to you), or have it stuffed, mounted and
>sold at auction.  All of these things are prohibited.  Yet you complain
>about something as harmless to yourself as this, and something which may
>help a number of other people?

Those laws are in place to prevent alleged health hazards and for the 
practical purpose of holding a captive market for the funeral industry.  SO 
long as the disposition of your remains does not create a public health 
hazard, you may do what you wish.  You can, for example, be "dumped in a 
river," after cremation.

Further, libertarianism does not preclude humanitarianism.  The issue is not 
one of whether or not one "should" be an organ donor, but whether or not the 
state has the "right" to MAKE one an organ donor without express consent.

>>
>>Or do you believe personal property, e.g., the house I spent years
>>paying for and working on, should also be "shared" with whoever
>>needs it ?  Why is that any different, assuming noone else lives there
>>and the mortgage is paid off ?  I don't need it anymore, I'm dead!
>>
>It is different because your house and personal property have intrinsic
>value, and your corpse does not.  It costs your estate nothing...not one
>plugged nickel...to give your organs to another person or persons.

Your body has considerable intrinsic value.  When the transplant is 
performed, the hospital will profit, the surgeon will profit, then entire OR 
team will profit, and the state will profit, but your estate will not see 
a dime.  While you may be able to make a case for the recipient of an organ 
being a time for altruism, there is a lot of profit being made.  

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=