Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

Organ Donors and Recipients

SkepticalStardust
Posts: 117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 8:42:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Proposition:
Organ donors should always receive organs before adult non-organ donors.

I would explain the reasoning behind this, but I feel as though it doesn't need any explaining. Do you agree or disagree with this proposition? Why?
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." " Christopher Hitchens
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 9:10:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Should people who have, say AIDS or some negative genetic disease which would bar them from being a donor, be penalized for not giving away their tainted organs?
My work here is, finally, done.
SkepticalStardust
Posts: 117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 10:01:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/24/2014 9:10:21 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Should people who have, say AIDS or some negative genetic disease which would bar them from being a donor, be penalized for not giving away their tainted organs?

How would you feel about making special circumstances for those unable to donate? I realize that it could be seen as unfair, since they still might not be donors even if they could donate, but the sentence "Not all non-donors are at the end of donor recipient lists, but all people at the end of donor recipient lists are always a non-donors" seems more fair to me than "Sometimes donors are at the end of donor recipient lists".

The point of putting non-donors at the end of donor recipient lists wouldn't be to punish non-donors; it would be to give donors a better chance at getting the same thing they're willing to give. Does that sound reasonable?
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." " Christopher Hitchens