Organ Transplant Bill
Discussion
Rovinghawk said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Rovinghawk said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
That would be an argument for the state having full ownership of dead bodies, and the compulsory allocation of usable parts to citizens in need. No opt in or out, no debate, no choice.
Communism taken to an entirely new level, comrade.TwigtheWonderkid said:
Except that I wasn't saying the state would own everything. Just dead bodies.
You want the state to take possession of what it wants for the presumed good of the people, regardless of personal choice. I put it to you that it's a very good step on the road to a communist dystopia and an interesting paving slab for the road to hell due to its good intentions. Hitler used a similar logic to yours when he took the gold teeth out of dead jews, wove their hair into cloth, etc- they didn't need them & it was for the good of the state. Based on that I'd accept that it's not communism so much as authoritarianism.
In fact why stop at internal organs? There's a desperate shortage of leather for shoes, handbags & car seats- let's utilise the skin of dead people as they no longer need it. You can just not publicise it, presume consent & crack on. It's the same argument as yours, just taken a step further.
Rovinghawk said:
Hitler used a similar logic to yours when he took the gold teeth out of dead jews, wove their hair into cloth, etc-
Well, no, it's hardly similar logic because Hitler orchestrated the deaths of millions of people then took what was theirs. It's not even comparable on any scale is it.Butter Face said:
Well, no, it's hardly similar logic because Hitler orchestrated the deaths of millions of people then took what was theirs. It's not even comparable on any scale is it.
Taking possession of dead bodies and using them for the wishes of the state............ sounds a bit similar AFAICS.Which bit of "you can opt out of the system" are people struggling with?
If you die with no next of kin and no will, who gets your stuff? Would you prefer your house to sit empty for all time because you couldn't be bothered to state what you wanted to happen to it after your death?
It really is little different to that.
If you die with no next of kin and no will, who gets your stuff? Would you prefer your house to sit empty for all time because you couldn't be bothered to state what you wanted to happen to it after your death?
It really is little different to that.
djc206 said:
We don’t need a referendum we have a parliamentary democracy.
This is definitely a constitutional issue, as such I would expect a referendum on something that alters the balance of state to individual rights in such a fundamental way.So after assumed consent will families be prosecuted if they object and obstruct? Will individuals no longer be allowed to die at home? What about non-UK citizens who die in the UK?
And what about the checks for consent withdrawal? A delayed response or computer error and they'll have to give the organ back?
wiggy001 said:
Which bit of "you can opt out of the system" are people struggling with?
We could start with the fact that very little publicity has been given to the government having opted every one in as a default position.We could then continue with the govt's stated intention on the website to try & overrule any opt-out by pestering the family.
Rovinghawk said:
We could start with the fact that very little publicity has been given to the government having opted every one in as a default position.
It was all over the news when it was announce by May, and has been in the press again this week which is presumably why we are discussing it. How would you like them to inform you? Remember it costs £9m to send a leaflet to every household, and even then many won't read it.Rovinghawk said:
We could then continue with the govt's stated intention on the website to try & overrule any opt-out by pestering the family.
jjlynn27 said:
Rovinghawk said:
jjlynn27 said:
If you can't change the system, change the system.
Brilliant idea, albeit difficult to enact.Rovinghawk said:
jjlynn27 said:
Rovinghawk said:
jjlynn27 said:
If you can't change the system, change the system.
Brilliant idea, albeit difficult to enact.If you can't change the system, as in you have to pay the taxes and the government will proceed with changes in regards to donations of organs, (tell me if I'm going too fast for you)
change the system; emigrate, change the system for one that will tax you less, one that will not have you whine, constantly, about pretty much everything. There must be a system, a country, somewhere that's not going to oppress you as much. With your abilities, it should be a walk in the park.
Edited by jjlynn27 on Friday 10th August 17:27
Rovinghawk said:
It's on the website, link provided earlier in the thread.
I know it's there because I read it there.
You couldn't possibly provide it again could you, please? Or give a rough idea how far through the thread it is? I am genuinely interested, but it's been a long week.I know it's there because I read it there.
Edited by Europa1 on Friday 10th August 17:37
Rovinghawk said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Except that I wasn't saying the state would own everything. Just dead bodies.
You want the state to take possession of what it wants for the presumed good of the people, regardless of personal choice. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff