Re: Organ donation

Lee Daniel Crocker (
Mon, 8 Sep 1997 22:32:02 -0700 (PDT)

> Lee Daniel Crocker <>:
> >Even if that problem were solved (as is not unlikely), I would
> >refuse organ donation under the present government because it is
> >not currently legal for my heirs to receive the fair market value
> >of my cellular property. Better it should go to waste than be
> >subjected to altruism at gunpoint.
> With all due respect; I am having some serious trouble with the last sentence.
> maybe this is a cultural difference between our respective home-country's
> or just a difference between you and me.
> It is problably not fair that heirs don't get good cash for donated organs
> but IMHO it would be terribly unfair to let a person die for lack of organs
> when a perfectly suitable organ is rotting away in a grave somewhere.
> Please don't misunderstand: I'm not saying one is "better" than the other
> just that I'm having *real* difficulty to follow your thinking here.
> And where did the "gunpoint" come from (didn't we already agree to disagree
> on this subject - for now anyway ;-)?

The "gunpoint" is that of the government arresting and jailing my
heirs for signing a freely-negotiated fully-consenting contract for
the sale of my organs. Breaking the tyranny of a government that
doesn't even recognize a man's most fundamental property--that of
his own body--does far more for the future of humanity than saving
one life in the short-term. I am not such hard-line capitalist that
I object to the idea of altruism itself, especially after I have no
personal use for my property, but a government that approves of theft
and a people that allow it are far more dangerous to the future than
one stubborn old capitalist.