Originally posted by sean_uk
This has been planned for a few years now, by the Nanny State, and has been carefully constructed so as not to appear too radical & controversial;
careful not to upset certain religions & beliefs; careful, because they need "LIVE" donors. People who are in comas and on life-support systems
will have there organs removed while they are still alive...
What utter garbage. Hardly worth even responding too, really.
BMA June 2000
"Each year many people die waiting for an organ transplant. At the same time, bodies are buried or cremated complete with organs that could have been
used to save lives, not because the deceased objected to donation but simply because they never got around to carrying a donor card or informing their
relatives of their wishes...”
[How ******* patronising!]
The plan begins:
Brainwash the Public
“Some of the changes proposed in this paper are likely to be controversial and need to be debated thoroughly before being implemented. Recognising
the risk of alienating some sections of the public by appearing to move too quickly, the BMA nonetheless considers that there are good arguments for
seeking change. Furthermore, it believes that with careful explanation, these proposals will win the support and backing of a majority of health
professionals and the public.”
Wanted Dead or Alive
“The BMA would like to see a thorough review of the existing legislation and some changes to the existing organisational structure and established
practice. In particular, we are calling for:
1. The introduction of a single, comprehensive, piece of legislation covering all aspects of organ donation - from both live and cadaveric donors:
- to provide a clear and unambiguous framework within which organ donation may take place;
- requiring that the most up to date guidelines are followed in determining death by brain stem tests before organs are removed;
- to remove the distinction between related and unrelated live altruistic donors. All live donations should be subject to the same rigorous
assessment, either by ULTRA or some other mechanism, to ensure that the potential donor is acting voluntarily and free from pressure;
- to give legal authorisation to the use of invasive procedures, after death, to protect organs in the period leading up to the transplant in order to
facilitate greater use of non-heartbeating donors; and
- to introduce a system of presumed consent… "
Like I said, I don't have anything against people who "choose" to donate, it is their choice. I have no respect for arrogant & ignorant "lumps of
meat", who cannot understand that people have different beliefs to themselves and they have a choice on how they live their lives, and what happens
to them when they die.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I got the impression that this thread was about FREEDOM & CHOICE, not a Pro-Life / Pro death debate.
People have NEVER debated about organ donating, like they do about abortion. Doners have always been in the minority because most people do not want
to donate; all that BS about surveys saying 70% of people would donate... how many people did they survey? a few thousand?
[edit on 15-1-2008 by sean_uk]