Saudi Arabia is way cool

[mrswdk]

LOL

[Symmetry]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_tran ... n_in_China

They were not detained for the purposes of organ harvesting, they were detained because Jiang Zemin was a paranoid old frog.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_transplantation_in_China

[patches70]

I don't have much of an opinion on the House of Saud's new city, I really don't give a shit about them. But there is this tidbit I can't help but notice-

Personally, I don't see how it benefits society to outlaw the harvesting of organs from someone who is dead. A dead person no longer has any use for their kidney or liver, but someone who is still alive might.

I seem to recall in another thread somewhere (correct me if I'm wrong) but I seem to remember you, mrswdk, in a thread about inheritance tax you saying something about it's someone's money, the State or other people don't have a claim to it because the person who owns it gets to decide what happens to that money when they pass on. You know, ownership and such.

Well, if there is one thing I can safely say that people should own without condition, even if they are a prisoner of the state, is that individuals certainly own their own bodies, correct?

So if someone doesn't want their organs to be harvested you can't rightly say that they have no choice in the matter and at the same time take the position you did on the inheritance tax. They are exactly the same issue, what is to be done with one's belongings after they die. A person owns their body, every little bit of it. If they have not consented to giving their organs after death then the state has no right to take those organs, no one does. It doesn't matter who can be saved and it doesn't matter if the person in question is a prisoner, they still own their bodies no matter what. IMO.

Then there is the perverse incentive of making laws that confiscate a person's organs if they are prisoners of the state. It can (and will) devolve into an organ harvesting scheme which targets those who are least able to defend themselves (the poor) for the benefit of those in higher social standing (the elite).

[Dukasaur]

They were not detained for the purposes of organ harvesting, they were detained because Jiang Zemin was a paranoid old frog.

You don't think that commercial exploitation of their bodies made a good secondary motive?

[mrswdk]

Personally, I don't see how it benefits society to outlaw the harvesting of organs from someone who is dead. A dead person no longer has any use for their kidney or liver, but someone who is still alive might.

I seem to recall in another thread somewhere (correct me if I'm wrong) but I seem to remember you, mrswdk, in a thread about inheritance tax you saying something about it's someone's money, the State or other people don't have a claim to it because the person who owns it gets to decide what happens to that money when they pass on. You know, ownership and such.

Well, if there is one thing I can safely say that people should own without condition, even if they are a prisoner of the state, is that individuals certainly own their own bodies, correct?

States usually outlaw the destruction of their currency. I can leave my money to whomever I choose after I die, but I can't will that it be piled up outside my front door and burned. There's no reason the same approach shouldn't be taken with organs - leave them to who you like, but don't destroy them.

Then there is the perverse incentive of making laws that confiscate a person's organs if they are prisoners of the state. It can (and will) devolve into an organ harvesting scheme which targets those who are least able to defend themselves (the poor) for the benefit of those in higher social standing (the elite).

There is no reason why permitting organs to be harvested after a prisoner dies or is executed would descend into some sort of program of abducting poor people and chopping them up at the request of rich people. This isn't Mad Max. Do countries where inheritance taxes exist see lots of cases of old people being murdered by the state so that it can collect its taxes on their estates? Do many children murder their parents so that they can cash in on their wills?

[Symmetry]

Personally, I don't see how it benefits society to outlaw the harvesting of organs from someone who is dead. A dead person no longer has any use for their kidney or liver, but someone who is still alive might.

I seem to recall in another thread somewhere (correct me if I'm wrong) but I seem to remember you, mrswdk, in a thread about inheritance tax you saying something about it's someone's money, the State or other people don't have a claim to it because the person who owns it gets to decide what happens to that money when they pass on. You know, ownership and such.

Well, if there is one thing I can safely say that people should own without condition, even if they are a prisoner of the state, is that individuals certainly own their own bodies, correct?

States usually outlaw the destruction of their currency. I can leave my money to whomever I choose after I die, but I can't will that it be piled up outside my front door and burned. There's no reason the same approach shouldn't be taken with organs - leave them to who you like, but don't destroy them.

Then there is the perverse incentive of making laws that confiscate a person's organs if they are prisoners of the state. It can (and will) devolve into an organ harvesting scheme which targets those who are least able to defend themselves (the poor) for the benefit of those in higher social standing (the elite).

There is no reason why permitting organs to be harvested after a prisoner dies or is executed would descend into some sort of program of abducting poor people and chopping them up at the request of rich people. This isn't Mad Max. Do countries where inheritance taxes exist see lots of cases of old people being murdered by the state so that it can collect its taxes on their estates? Do many children murder their parents so that they can cash in on their wills?

Countries that allow organ harvesting tend to require permission. China allows it from political prisoners.

[mrswdk]

That doesn't really address any of the points I made.

[Symmetry]

That doesn't really address any of the points I made.

Cry me a river.