View Single Post
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 05-07-2008, 04:19 PM
nathanbforrest45's Avatar
nathanbforrest45 nathanbforrest45 is online now
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: mountains of East TN
Posts: 9,745
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TakuanSoho View Post
I agree with you in principle, which is why I said that laws COULD mitigate a lot of potential abuses, but come on, knowing our government, do you really see them passing this sort of law or denying treatment?

Granted we are dealing with a hypothetical, however we should still deal with the probable outcomes, not an idealistic one.

Actually, I would say the donor/salesman of the kidney could sign every form known to man and there would still be those who would want to absolve him of his lunacy in selling a kidney.

If a law not allowing a hospital to require a disclaimer could be passed it would open up a market for kidneys and could help lower the cost of the transplant. However, this type of transaction would only work in a moral atmosphere. What would happen in the Sudan for example? Would the government decide Christians only needed one kidney and go onto the kidney harvesting business?

In theory I agree with Coyote. Free traders should be allowed to trade anything. My fear is those who don't truly believe in free trade but do believe in making money without a moral base.

By the way, I seldom operate in the probable. I don't know enough about the probable to make rational statements. So, I work in the ideal or at the very least the questionable.
__________________
Its better to have fussed and crabbed then never to have fussed at all - Lucy
Reply With Quote