Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So what IMO Iran is doing one thing right and letting people sell organs and it is regulated by the gvt. You still did not answer it is my body my choice is ok for abortion but not ok to sell a organ. Why not?
I do want control over the organs I donate. I want them to go to whatever person has the greatest need and best outcome. I do not want them to go to the highest bidder or the person who can afford to outbid the others!
I never said it would be cheap. But there might be a larger market which would bring prices down.
How many people die a year in the US waiting on organ donators? I bet it is in the tens of thousands.
What product or service can you think of that is denied to people by capitalism? None that I can think of. Even poor people in capitalist countries are able to obtain food, clothing, shelter and other necessities. I see no reason to think organs would be different.
Other than some poor person selling one of his kidneys so that he can use the money to put food on the table, how do you see selling organs increasing the number of available donors? A person cannot sell what he isn't done using yet. And since the quality of those organs cannot be determined until after death, how would a pre-death price be determined?
If you own part of the river are you going to pollute it? Are you going to let someone else pollute it?
And who says only corporations would own the rivers anyway?
If corporations are polluting public rivers, they have no integrity or respect for our natural resources. A polluted river is a polluted river whether it is owned publicly or privately.
Actually, doctors developed the protocol for the transplant list. Government has allowed doctors free reign to do what they believe is the best based on medical and scientific knowledge. Kathleen Sebellius allowed doctors to continue to practice medicine without government interference. A federal judge did not.
The wealthy will get the organs and the rest of the population will be donating their's for cash to pay the bills.
The organ belongs to the donor. They can make arrangements as far as to whom it should go to if that is their want.
Here's the part of your post that should bother everyone. "Government has allowed"
Government doesn't own you. It's your body. As an adult, as long as you are not infringing on the rights of others do with it what you want.
That being said, Ron Paul is a moron. The free market is not the cure and be-all end-all solution to everything
Ron Paul isn't the moron here. The morons are those who do the same thing over and over again and expect different results.
Ron Paul was the only Presidential candidate who told us to expect a large crash when government manipulated the housing market and he was right. He was the only Presidential candidate who told us our foreign policy of invade and occupy would make us less safe and to expect an attack and he was right.
So you believe that corporations would no longer pollute the river they own? If you do, I have a bridge over a polluted river I would like to sell you.
So you don't believe they would get sued by those who were adversely affected by the pollution?
Why thank you government. Because of you there is no pollution. Los Angeles thanks you.
Hey wait a minute, is it not one of the left arguments that it is my body and my choice when it comes to abortion? Why does n't that same thinking apply for organ transplants? I support it and I would not care what the persons wealth was, it is none of my business I am willingly fulfilling a contract.
From your post, I assume you are in favor of pro-choice, against mandatory vaginal ultrasounds, pro-contraception availability, and allowing full disclosure of any company that dispenses any chemical in such a way that it is introduced into our bodies.
Supply and demand would drive the price of scarce organs, such as lungs, through the roof! How much could you pay for a set of lungs or heart if you needed one to live? Should there be a live auction for organs?
You made this up just like you made things up in your other posts. Show proof prices would go up.
Someone wont give their organs away for free so no one gets them. The option opens up for someone to sell it. Now that they are able to sell it, one person will get the organ. So saving a life is a bad thing?
Well Ok, if you say so. Russia will be the highest bidder of the majority of Alaska, which is public land.
The Saudi's will out bid everyone and take all public roads and impose $100 tolls every 10 miles.
China will win the military bases.
The Germans want the parks.
Wall Street will broker the whole deal and take a 20% fee.
You've been drinking again.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And since the quality of those organs cannot be determined until after death, how would a pre-death price be determined?
If you do, I have a bridge over a polluted river I would like to sell you.
