Hi y'all - yes I believe that it is rational to assume that the body has only one really useful purpose after death, and that is to possibly save the lives of others. The implied consent law would be a huge boon to all those on the organ transplant waiting list, many of whom die waiting. Religious or other objections can be upheld by opting out of the system, thus satisfying the irrational. Many people don't even think of organ donation, and implied consent would either make them think, or if they choose to continue in their own oblivious way, help them provide a useful service to society. How do y'all feel?
On Nov 29, 1:39 am, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, all is one. > > On Nov 28, 9:29 pm, Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > They all describe the same thing. > > > On Nov 28, 10:23 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >http://www.onelook.com/?w=rational&ls=a > > > > On Nov 28, 7:32 pm, Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > <<To assume that one's own brand of being 'rational' (meaning whatever > > > > 'I' think is ok) trumps anyone else's view and/or rights is 'rather > > > > irrational' too, no?>> > > > > > No. There are no "brands" of rational. > > > > > > On Nov 28, 6:58 pm, Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > He probably is in favor of "presumed consent." I agree. To be > > > > > > concerned what happens to your body after you die is rather > > > > > > irrational. My mother, for instance, is concerned that when Christ > > > > > > returns, she will have pieces of her body missing when she rises > > > > > > from > > > > > > the dead. > > > > > > > On Nov 28, 8:41 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm not sure which aspect you consider to be the 'good idea'. I > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > lived in states where a sticker is placed on the dirver's license > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > one wants to donate...and even what in some cases. This sort of > > > > > > > thing > > > > > > > is quite common already. However, IF you are suggesting that > > > > > > > everyone > > > > > > > should, with or without their consent, have to donate organs a > > > > > > > debate > > > > > > > would ensue. > > > > > > > > On Nov 28, 11:25 am, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi y'all > > > > > > > > -http://www.chesterchronicle.co.uk/chester-news/local-chester-news/che... > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
