September 4, 200917 yr Anyways, IMO laws pertaining to individual rights should be based on their constitutionality, NOT "how it effects the poor." Is there a consitutional basis for such a law? I'm sure being the intelligent well-coached young man that you are that you realize the gray area involved in determining such a thing, correct? Does the "abortion" ruling ring a bell?
September 4, 200917 yr Bravo,my man. Do I have the ability today to state in my will that my organs are ONLY to be donated to those in need and not for research? You could put it in your Will, the question is whether that provision would be enforceable. I honestly don't know the answer to that question. It may very well vary by state.
September 4, 200917 yr Is there a consitutional basis for such a law? I'm sure being the intelligent well-coached young man that you are that you realize the gray area involved in determining such a thing, correct? Does the "abortion" ruling ring a bell? Its not a liberty right, its a property right. The question in the case law that I have seen usually concerns whether donated property is considered discarded property for purposes of after-use and profit.
September 4, 200917 yr Is there a consitutional basis for such a law? I'm sure being the intelligent well-coached young man that you are that you realize the gray area involved in determining such a thing, correct? Does the "abortion" ruling ring a bell? :clap: I especially like the bolded- brings me back to 7th grade. As for the grey area...there is most certainly is one, and that is what should be debated. IMO, what you brought up, "what it would do to the poor" should be no more than an afterthought in creating laws, because they should be based on nothing but the Constitution. FWIW, the fact that "what would it do to the poor" isn't part of the lawmaking is too bad, but it's better to live in a democracy than a theocracy (in which welfare for the poverty-stricked would be a legitimate issue). This is why, as individuals, we have such a duty to the poor- because it doesn't make sense to consider them politically, for a variety of reasons.
September 6, 200917 yr :clap: I especially like the bolded- brings me back to 7th grade. . If the above was intentional, bravo to you.
September 6, 200917 yr If the above was intentional, bravo to you. I figured that it was intentional from you. :ylsuper:
September 6, 200917 yr Heck yeah... if you grow it you ought to be able to sell it! (NOTE: I'm kidding, mostly). :lol::sssh::lol:
September 7, 200917 yr Organs don't just willy nilly fit and work in everybody. Donated organs have to be cross matched with potential recipients. You may want to donate to specific people, but that may not be medically possible. Just because you may be 1st on a list doesn't mean that you get the 1st heart available. You get the 1st heart that matches what your body can accept. All the money in the world might get you to the top of a list, but it can't override nature.
September 7, 200917 yr Organs don't just willy nilly fit and work in everybody. Donated organs have to be cross matched with potential recipients. You may want to donate to specific people, but that may not be medically possible. Just because you may be 1st on a list doesn't mean that you get the 1st heart available. You get the 1st heart that matches what your body can accept. All the money in the world might get you to the top of a list, but it can't override nature.You beat me to it. The medical community would have to retain control of this in order to ensure that organs don't just go to waste. Btw, I'm not selling my organs unless they start a Cash for Clunkers program.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.