Liverpool FC Forum

[dawson99]

It's this simple.

If someones dead but has a good ticker, give it to someone who needs a good ticker.

[andy_g]

Shame your not a fascist you could make the trains run on time while hunting organs

What trains, they closed our station in the early seventies, maybe I should travel to Wales, I hear they have a ready source of trains I could hunt down.

did they close down irony at the same time

if trains aren't irony then what the hell are they? 

[Bad Bob]

So basically what you are saying Bob is that the dead have rights and that is more important than the fact that these rights can and will lead to even more deaths.  The Argentinians trapped in the Andes obviously didn't agree. (I am not arguing we should fkn eat them before anyone starts)

If you and your family were starving, and next door there was a field full of food rotting because the owner had died and there was no one to gather the food in, I take it that you would watch your family die rather than infringe on your dead neighbours rights and take some food?

There are millions of people dying in Africa every year, their bodies just thrown into mass graves, and you would rather respect the rights of the dead than use their organs to save countless lives around the world? Yet people find it quite acceptable to end life almost before its begun with experiments on embrio's and abortion.

A dead body is a dead body, if its got cholera or whichever contagious disease the body is burned, the dead persons wishes and rights arn't considered, because its a threat to life. Similarly if a dead body can be used to save lives IT SHOULD BE. 

While I find your view admirable, I also find it distasteful that ANYONE would wish to see pain, suffering and death in thousands of people because of some outdated view of morality and the rights of the dead.

The West wont provide the starving Africans with the money to change things significantly now or in the forseable future, so its a vicious cycle of death. Better to use those bodies for something of value rather than rotting in some mass pit. While the money their families/towns/villages/government would receive could be used to improve things in a substantial way.

Death and nothing on the one hand....... life for thousands and a future for millions on the other. I know which I think is the most humane.

Yes its morbid to think of surgeons standing by waiting of people to die before they gather the harvest, but people are just standing by waiting of these people to die anyway.

Someone commits suicide and everyone says "what a waste of a life", some body rotting in a grave is also a waste if it could be used to save lives.

Once you are dead you are dead and all that is left is the chance of life for someone else, but you would rather honour the dead at the expense of the living.

Maybe we should turn the clock back and say all bodies are sacrosanct and shouldn't be touched. So no experiments, no post mortums, no organ transplants , no blood transfusions.

When we die our bodies are allowed to be dissected, our organs removed weighed analysed, but make sure you put all the bits back before we are buried because ? What fkn difference does it make , your fkn dead and unlikely to ever need those organs again. 

Anyway you can see it whichever way you want, personally I am pro life not pro death. If you think its barbaric to treat the dead in such an unseemly manner, I see the forced deaths of thousands of people because of sentiment as barbaric.

Well, Saint, I wasn't talking about the dead because originally you weren't either.  There was a lot of talk about harvesting organs from dying Africans but no mention about those already dead.  But if that's what you'd like to focus on now, I'll respond.  Would I oppose organ donations from dead Africans?  No, so long as the families of the dead approved.  If they didn't then those wishes need to be honoured in the same way our society honours the expressed wishes of the deceased or those of their living family members.  Basically, if the rights protecting the wishes of the dead are good enough for us then they're good enough for anyone on earth.  Without exception.

And, this leads me back to my major frustration with your original comments.  Why the focus on 3rd World peoples at all?  If organ harvesting is so necessary, why not harvest organs from your own dead?  Why not pass a law in Britain that makes it mandatory for all citizens to donate all of their healthy organs and usable soft tissue upon their death?  Why set up this whole dichotomy between the worthy British, who need these organs to survive, and the unworthy, 'primitive', 'spear sharpening', 'cave painting' 'no marks' who are just going to die anyway.  And, newsflash, not everyone living in Africa let alone the wider "3rd World" are destined to die horrible, wasteful deaths through lack of foreign aid.  Millions of Africans live healthy, productive, 'civilized' lives--it's a massive, diverse and vibrant continent, FFS, and not some barren wasteland of the damned.  The colonial mindset of the civilized Englishman (or Canadian, for that matter) vs. the primitive African/Aborigine/Native American etc. should have been eradicated a long, long time ago.  The fact that it still exists and that it can be so breezily inserted into a debate over organ harvesting troubles me deeply.

[dawson99]

IF we were to take organs.. why not take from 3rd World? They have the biggest population/money /economic/food problems. We can't afford to keep bailing them out when we can't look after our own country so why teh feck not?
Kill two birds with one stone. Help one person and deal with the over population problem

The fact is, not all people are equal. What s@int meant, if you ask me, was that all dead should be allowed to be harvested no matter what. I think that countries where they can't help themselves should help us. If we give them 500 million for whatever they give us some organs... fair deal, as so far we've got nothing back and the problem still there. Feck it, what I really think is. We should not give any other countries money at the moment when we need to spend billions on our own country which we cant afford.

If at home my mum was hungry and so was someone across the street, I'd say 'f*ck the person across the street, mum comes first"
thats how UK should look at how it spends money.

And, REALLY harsh. They are dying anyway, at least let them help someone along the way.
Couldn't care less, I won't give to any charities to asve Africa or whatever. I give to shelter, RSPCA, charities that will help where I live, coz trust me, we need the money as well. Its not a race thing, its a 'save ourselves first" thing. And we need saving

[account deleted by request]

I haven't read ALL your post yet Bob but you are wrong in the first line. I wasn't talking about KILLING them for their organs, but you dont need to be dead to donate a kidney. You harvest the kidneys from the living, the hearts and other parts from the dead. 

No where did I say kill, shoot, execute them. Originally I meant waiting for them to die, or take the organs you can while they are alive. The point I was making was why save a million today, only to let 10million die tomorrow.  So why provide temporary aid today (sparing them) when they will only be in the same or far worse situation tomorrow. Better to use their organs and provide a better future both for their country (money) while saving lives here. 

There are millions of people dying of famine,disease etc all around the world, better they be put to some good use by providing extra life to people who can make a difference in the quality of life of future generations, than sparing them because some bleeding heart kunt thinks that a future civilisation may develop from their offspring.

[Effes]

Look what Dude Love has started!

[Judge]

presumed consent should be implemented

then people will have to opt out - that would be better

[aCe']

IF we were to take organs.. why not take from 3rd World? They have the biggest population/money /economic/food problems. We can't afford to keep bailing them out when we can't look after our own country so why teh feck not?
Kill two birds with one stone. Help one person and deal with the over population problem

The fact is, not all people are equal. What s@int meant, if you ask me, was that all dead should be allowed to be harvested no matter what. I think that countries where they can't help themselves should help us. If we give them 500 million for whatever they give us some organs... fair deal, as so far we've got nothing back and the problem still there. Feck it, what I really think is. We should not give any other countries money at the moment when we need to spend billions on our own country which we cant afford.

If at home my mum was hungry and so was someone across the street, I'd say 'f*ck the person across the street, mum comes first"
thats how UK should look at how it spends money.

And, REALLY harsh. They are dying anyway, at least let them help someone along the way.
Couldn't care less, I won't give to any charities to asve Africa or whatever. I give to shelter, RSPCA, charities that will help where I live, coz trust me, we need the money as well. Its not a race thing, its a 'save ourselves first" thing. And we need saving

what the fck are you talking about stupid ?!

so basically ur saying they should be nice enough to go out and rip the organs off their dead and mail them to ur fcking penthouse because they might as well help you out when theyr dying anyways ?!

Or maybe ur suggesting you go out and shoot them 'no marks' like ur little pathetic friend there waas suggesting not so long ago "to deal with their overpopulation problem"...then rip out their organs and use them because obviously "not all people are equal" and ur way better than they are...

if you dont wanna fcking spend ur money on poor african children then dont fckin spend it but dnt fckin come out suggesting its ur fckin god given right to rip out their organs and have it whenever u please simply because your fckin life expectancy is higher than their or ur fckin bank account has more money...

and by the way... go fck urself while ur at it !

[account deleted by request]

And, this leads me back to my major frustration with your original comments.  Why the focus on 3rd World peoples at all?  If organ harvesting is so necessary, why not harvest organs from your own dead?  Why not pass a law in Britain that makes it mandatory for all citizens to donate all of their healthy organs and usable soft tissue upon their death?  Why set up this whole dichotomy between the worthy British, who need these organs to survive, and the unworthy, 'primitive', 'spear sharpening', 'cave painting' 'no marks' who are just going to die anyway.  And, newsflash, not everyone living in Africa let alone the wider "3rd World" are destined to die horrible, wasteful deaths through lack of foreign aid.  Millions of Africans live healthy, productive, 'civilized' lives--it's a massive, diverse and vibrant continent, FFS, and not some barren wasteland of the damned.  The colonial mindset of the civilized Englishman (or Canadian, for that matter) vs. the primitive African/Aborigine/Native American etc. should have been eradicated a long, long time ago.  The fact that it still exists and that it can be so breezily inserted into a debate over organ harvesting troubles me deeply.

Now for the rest of your post. I agree that all organs should be harvested, both here and abroad. I don't believe there should be any doubts about that. Maybe if we paid for the organs and the blood there wouldn't be such a shortage. I used the third world as an example because who is more likely to want to sell a kidney, the affluent business man or the starving native?

After death there is no problem, they are not using it so if someone needs it let them have it. The problem is people over here tend to live longer and so their organs arn't much use, while in the 3rd world you have a large number of early deaths.

Its nothing to do with Colonialism/Fascism or any ism, its to do with being practical. We live on average into our 70's, while they have mass deaths at a much earlier age.

[aCe']

I haven't read ALL your post yet Bob but you are wrong in the first line. I wasn't talking about KILLING them for their organs, but you dont need to be dead to donate a kidney. You harvest the kidneys from the living, the hearts and other parts from the dead. 

No where did I say kill, shoot, execute them. Originally I meant waiting for them to die, or take the organs you can while they are alive. The point I was making was why save a million today, only to let 10million die tomorrow.  So why provide temporary aid today (sparing them) when they will only be in the same or far worse situation tomorrow. Better to use their organs and provide a better future both for their country (money) while saving lives here. 

There are millions of people dying of famine,disease etc all around the world, better they be put to some good use by providing extra life to people who can make a difference in the quality of life of future generations, than sparing them because some bleeding heart kunt thinks that a future civilisation may develop from their offspring.

what the fck do u mean by sparing them ?!

[dawson99]

LOL, you people still think we are GREAT Britain. do you know how many die here? How many homeless? How many elderly who can't afford electricity? But you fecking holier than thouu save the worlders would rather help some two-bit nothing country that is destroying the planet than your own neighbours. Me and s@int are realists.
I'm not saying shoot anyone for organs. I'm personally, and don't know if s@int agrees, that we should spend our money on us, and feck them.

And stop beign so righteous, some people are worth more than others. that's the way it has always been. It's people like you that are causing the problems here. the planet's gonna die and you just wanna 'feed the word, make it a betetr place' Imagine if there was no starvation, and death rates were the asme everywhere, the planet would be dead in 100 years.
Nuke the country, get it over with, sort ourselves out then when the dusts cleared we can pop over and have a bit mroe space.
(Who knwos where the serious ends and the joking at the stupidity of you self loving self righteous eejits begins)

I'm not Jon Snow, now over to someone for the whogivesacr@p report

[account deleted by request]

I haven't read ALL your post yet Bob but you are wrong in the first line. I wasn't talking about KILLING them for their organs, but you dont need to be dead to donate a kidney. You harvest the kidneys from the living, the hearts and other parts from the dead. 

No where did I say kill, shoot, execute them. Originally I meant waiting for them to die, or take the organs you can while they are alive. The point I was making was why save a million today, only to let 10million die tomorrow.  So why provide temporary aid today (sparing them) when they will only be in the same or far worse situation tomorrow. Better to use their organs and provide a better future both for their country (money) while saving lives here. 

There are millions of people dying of famine,disease etc all around the world, better they be put to some good use by providing extra life to people who can make a difference in the quality of life of future generations, than sparing them because some bleeding heart kunt thinks that a future civilisation may develop from their offspring.

what the fck do u mean by sparing them ?!

I mean if you don't give them aid ...... they die!

[aCe']

And, this leads me back to my major frustration with your original comments.  Why the focus on 3rd World peoples at all?  If organ harvesting is so necessary, why not harvest organs from your own dead?  Why not pass a law in Britain that makes it mandatory for all citizens to donate all of their healthy organs and usable soft tissue upon their death?  Why set up this whole dichotomy between the worthy British, who need these organs to survive, and the unworthy, 'primitive', 'spear sharpening', 'cave painting' 'no marks' who are just going to die anyway.  And, newsflash, not everyone living in Africa let alone the wider "3rd World" are destined to die horrible, wasteful deaths through lack of foreign aid.  Millions of Africans live healthy, productive, 'civilized' lives--it's a massive, diverse and vibrant continent, FFS, and not some barren wasteland of the damned.  The colonial mindset of the civilized Englishman (or Canadian, for that matter) vs. the primitive African/Aborigine/Native American etc. should have been eradicated a long, long time ago.  The fact that it still exists and that it can be so breezily inserted into a debate over organ harvesting troubles me deeply.

Now for the rest of your post. I agree that all organs should be harvested, both here and abroad. I don't believe there should be any doubts about that. Maybe if we paid for the organs and the blood there wouldn't be such a shortage. I used the third world as an example because who is more likely to want to sell a kidney, the affluent business man or the starving native?

After death there is no problem, they are not using it so if someone needs it let them have it. The problem is people over here tend to live longer and so their organs arn't much use, while in the 3rd world you have a large number of early deaths.

Its nothing to do with Colonialism/Fascism or any ism, its to do with being practical. We live on average into our 70's, while they have mass deaths at a much earlier age.

lsn you dont just take the organ out of the dead body... Judge would know better than i would but from what i understand you have to be brain dead but ur heart is still ticking for them to take out the organs because soon after u die the organs become unusable... thats why most organs come from relatively younger people who die from accidents or other sudden deaths rather than slow painful deaths like most poor africans and 3rd world native do...

uv changed ur tone completely and while i still disagree with what you say atleast now what ur saying is starting to sound a little less embarrassing for you...

what ur suggesting is to have an organ market...in which case u most likely wouldnt need organ harvesting in 3rd world countries or whatever... if you can get more people in a given country agreeing to give away their organs after their deaths if theyr usable then you wouldnt hav an organ shortage anymore .. its as simple as that really.. what u have i a shortage of supply of organs in most countries... u need to give people incentive to give away their organs after theyr death or to sell them if they can afford to live without them in some cases as uv suggested... its simple demand and supply but in saying that u have to be careful cause its a very controversial topic and u dont wanna come out as a cold hearted sob who deals with organs like theyr groceries..

most governments and oprgan transplant centers dismiss the very notion of having an organ market on grounds of morality... u obiously have very little of that so its easier to talk to you and convince you about that i guess..
what happens in real life is that u have way too many organ transplant centers that make way too much money BUT end up actually performing very few transplant per year... thats not good for many reasons ..most importantly because they -in many cases- end up messing up transplants and causing more harm than good...
basically..less transplant centers the better... but it makes good business to open up a transplant center even if u perform 3 or 4 transplants a year because you make sht loadds of meny from them... organ sharing agencies do to.. its rent seeking more than anything really...


The only solution that makes sense is having an organ market... have people giving up their organs WILLINGLY because theyr better off doing so... if they dont want to then fine... there will be plenty others who would...

[aCe']

LOL, you people still think we are GREAT Britain. do you know how many die here? How many homeless? How many elderly who can't afford electricity? But you fecking holier than thouu save the worlders would rather help some two-bit nothing country that is destroying the planet than your own neighbours. Me and s@int are realists.
I'm not saying shoot anyone for organs. I'm personally, and don't know if s@int agrees, that we should spend our money on us, and feck them.

And stop beign so righteous, some people are worth more than others. that's the way it has always been. It's people like you that are causing the problems here. the planet's gonna die and you just wanna 'feed the word, make it a betetr place' Imagine if there was no starvation, and death rates were the asme everywhere, the planet would be dead in 100 years.
Nuke the country, get it over with, sort ourselves out then when the dusts cleared we can pop over and have a bit mroe space.
(Who knwos where the serious ends and the joking at the stupidity of you self loving self righteous eejits begins)

I'm not Jon Snow, now over to someone for the whogivesacr@p report

yea... why even bother wasting time replying to that...

[account deleted by request]

The problem is mate, very few people in the West will volunteer to give up or sell a kidney unless its to a close family member. You need a supply of kidneys from people who are desperate enough to sell them. I am not too sure how long organs last after death but I presume if they have big freezer trucks that would work for the hearts lungs etc.

At the end of the day once you are dead you are dead and if someone needs an organ to live it should be taken with permission or no permission.