People who disagree with organ donation.

MadassAlex

Maybe you should.

Smoking is pretty terrible, but it's not easy to stop.

Gelzo

MillerCross

Smoking is pretty terrible, but it's not easy to stop. 

I've found it easy to stop, myself. I only smoke like...once every 3 months.

Hatter

I've never understood opposition to organ donation. I mean, if it's for religious reasons ("BAWWW I NEED MAH KIDNAH FOH WHEN DA LAWD REZ-ERECTS ME!") then, if God is so powerful, why wouldn't he just GIVE you the organs when you're rez'd? You're already coming back to life, so what's one or two organs? Plus, you'd be HELPING people.

And if it's for sentimental reasons... Grow up. When you die, you're just a piece of meat. There's nothing left of YOU inside. It may look like you (for the first week or two, anyway), but it isn't you. Better for some of that meat to serve the people who actually need it, than to provide the worms with just a little more food.

Gelzo

Plus, it's not like your corpse gets any more useful or pretty after hundreds of years.

Hatter

Well, I'm either going to get my ashes made into a carbon diamond or my body petrified in a lewd pose, so barring theft or vandalism I think I'll look pretty awesome in hundreds of years.

┻━┻ ︵ ヽ(`Д´）╯︵ ┻━┻

I wonder if worms would actually bother trying to eat my corpse if it was grinded into powder and scattered everywhere...

Maybe I should ask for cremation too.

TheConductor

I don't actually think you should get the option when it comes to organ donation. When you die, We're taking your organs.

Beholderess

That paranoia...that was common in the 70s. Did you grow up in that decade? That would explain it.

Nay, this one is younger than that. This one simply does not trust people enough to give them yet another (as if they don't have more than enough of it already) reason to set numerical value on this one's life and discard it when it is of better use elsewhere. People are already counting whether it's "efficient" to help some people to survive or is it a waste of resources.

Ponicalica

«mightI ask what? This one is not offended, by the way, she is genuinely curious. »

The link said «lolAvatar» so it's that.

Satan

@Conductor I want to be cryo'd so that would sort of fuck with my living forever plan. 

@Beholderess You certainly have a reason for paranoia, living in Russia (IIRC) of such a thing. I would be lying if I said I wasn't paranoid of the same thanks to the many, many utilitarians in the Canadian system. 

EDIT: GOD DAMNIT! Which account here isn't a sockpuppet?!

┻━┻ ︵ ヽ(`Д´）╯︵ ┻━┻

When you die, We're taking your organs.

Otherwise it's to the corpse rape chamber with you!

(what? It's more useful than leaving the body alone)

Beholderess

Not saying that such things cannot happen when organ donation is not mandatory, but still, it would increase an incentive by merely presenting one's incises as a resource to begin with. It is better to let people gain as little as possible from one's death. Again, this one is not even talking about deliberate killing. People are already arguing that money spent on providing care for patients in vegetative state could be better spent elsewhere (note that from this one's point of view the person in such state if effectively dead for she values sapience ad sapience only. However, this one is very bothered that this particular justification is being used). Is it such a bit step to see such reasoning applied not just to cases with no change of recovery whatsoever, but for those in which the chance of recovery is slim?

Also note that, as far as this one knows, for transplantation to be successful the fresher organs are, the better. So the ones got from a person who died in hospital preferably just a moment after person's death are much better than those harvested a couple of hours after someone's accidental death.

So it's not the case of someone just randomly dying and their body lying around, of no use to anyone. It's about being surrounded by people who have the needs of other patients to consider.Of course they try to save you,  they honestly do, but there is a thought in the back of their mind that your death won't be useless at least, your chances are slim and other people need their attention more...makes them more likely to consider your death an unfortunate but acceptable outcome. Pay less attention. Let it slip. And actually sigh in relief that despite their best effort you've died. No. (shudders).

┻━┻ ︵ ヽ(`Д´）╯︵ ┻━┻

I'm pretty sure enough people who consider the deaths of certain people an unfortunate but acceptable outcome, to the extent of where it makes them feel relieved, already exist anyway without encouragement.

Beholderess

They do. Does it mean that we need to encourage them more?

Speaking of which, an interesting article http://stanmed.stanford.edu/2011spring/article5.html that mentions, among other things, that in some cases organs are taken after cardiac death instead of brain death - in a timeframe in which heart could theoretically be restarted. Granted, in most of these cases there was just enough brain activity to not consider one technically dead, but it is a disturbing thought none the less. As been pointed out, the condition was still reversible.

┻━┻ ︵ ヽ(`Д´）╯︵ ┻━┻

Well, it would probably make some people feel more morally sane, but I don't really think there would be that much of a difference physically.

Also if the people trying to keep someone alive just doesn't tell anyone that they could have reversed the condition I don't think most would blame them either, since they don't know about it. I don't really think a few thousand/tens of thousands/whatever more people mourning for bodies that, for this purpose, are completely worthless if they are not disassembled will really significantly change the amount of sadness caused. It doesn't really matter that much if more people die if more people percieved to be worth saving can be kept alive in this particular situation.

Beholderess

Well, this one cannot agree with the numbers game. It does not matter to this one how much people die, what matters for her is which people die.

┻━┻ ︵ ヽ(`Д´）╯︵ ┻━┻

Well I prefer that too but the main problem with that is that society does not give a fuck about such a subjective thing, well right now anyway, given the entire concept of human rights, and we don't seem to be getting mind reading powers and an angelic (perhaps literally) monarch any time soon.

Beholderess

Of course this one is well aware that society does not give a damn. That's why this one is apprehensive to an idea.

Bee

I'm with Beholderess here.  Organ donation is awesome and I signed up for it, but I don't entirely trust people not to expedite things the wrong way.

GLORIOUSLeader

IIRC, Jews had a thing against organ donation until they realized it made them look like douchebags, so now I'm cool with it.

Since I live in a country where the majority of doctors are at least competent, I'll donate my organs fine if I die. 

IanExMachina

With mandatory donation, you would have strict regulations to ensure that people weren't just being left to die to harvest organs.

Bee

Strict regulations don't necessarily mean jack crap.

IanExMachina

Well in that case how can you trust doctors now to do anything at all in a hospital according the regulations?

┻━┻ ︵ ヽ(`Д´）╯︵ ┻━┻

until they realized it made them look like douchebags

That...isn't exactly what I would consider one of the better reasons to stop believing what you would prefer.

GLORIOUSLeader

Well, that and it's not really against anything in the Talmud/Old Testament. 

Okay, it kind of is, but we've forgone that in favor of "If it helps another person, then it's fine." 

Noimporta

That...isn't exactly what I would consider one of the better reasons to stop believing what you would prefer.

It is when you consider the kind of stuff there is on the Jews' holy scriptures.

Bee

IIRC the Catholic stance used to be against it for the whole resurrection thing, but they backed down over time figuring that you already decay and stuff in the meantime so yeah.