Thursday, February 23, 2006

Cannibals

Once the power of government is unleashed, there is no stopping it. In order to deal with a shortage of organs in the crumbling public health care system, the government now wants to claim your remains after they've sucked the blood out of your living body.

A few days ago I posted Paul McKeever's comments on a private member's bill put forth by NDP MPP Peter Kormos. If passed, this bill would assume consent was given to harvest your organs unless otherwise expressly indicated.

A second private member's bill has now been put forth by Conservative Frank Klees. This proposed mandate would employ the power of the state's monopoly over services and force you to make a choice. If you refuse, no health care or driving privileges for you.

A second private member's bill on organ donation was introduced in the Ontario legislature yesterday that would deny driver's licences and health cards to Ontario residents unless they have filled out a donor card.

Conservative Frank Klees said his bill would make those people who are 16 or older specify either yes, no or undecided to the question of whether they want to donate their organs after they die.

[..] "By building this mandatory declaration into the application process for a driver's licence and health card, I believe we'll guarantee that the issue of organ donation is considered by every Ontarian on a regular basis," Klees said.
Does choosing "undecided" mean your assent is assumed?

10 comments:

jacobin said...

the word "Cannibals" just doesn't do it justice

in china and other parts of the world, organs are being sold to rich powerful people who need them.what's to say that won't happen here?if you are of a rare type, who knows they might kill you just for your organs.

if this passes that means they own us when we are alive and now they own us when your dead, this is just fucking crazy

v said...

The Fog is in fine form!

This is another reason why I'm going to find it difficult to support John "Negative Option Billing" Tory this coming election. If John "Negative Option Billing" Tory wants to win the next election then John "Negative Option Billing" Tory better oppose this...errr...Negative Option Cannibalism. Of course, he won't, because he's a Toronto statist. Actually, he's worse than a statist, he's a statist and a corporate predator. I know people who work at Rogers and it's shameful what The Corporation makes their employees do. Klees isn't much better than Kormos for his uberstatist body snatching bill.

Lisa said...

NO support should be given to statists such as John Tory. Check out Freedom Party.

Little Tobacco said...

I'm pretty much on the Liberty and freedom side of things, as you London Foggers are aware, but I am having difficulty with the concept of how the state can violate the rights of a dead man.

Inviolability of the person, a fundamental freedom, would seem to come to a conclusion once the person is no longer competent, or in this case, a person. If the dead person has rights should not the unborn fetus have rights?

With that said, I am with you on the Frank Klees proposal. The idea of using the state monopoly as a gun is repugnant to freedom. Actually, the sate monopoly is repugnant to freedom for numerous reasons, including that it can be used as a gun.

Ayn Steyn said...

Little Tobacco,

It is not an issue of the dead person having rights but the use of a living person's property after death. Ones body parts are part of ones property and they should only be used as to ones wishes. The state should not assume that a person consents to give his parts to the government after death anymore than it should not assume that a person consents to giving his bank account to the government after death.

jacobin said...

Ayn Steyn said..."The state should not assume that a person consents to give his parts to the government after death anymore than it should not assume that a person consents to giving his bank account to the government after death."

i couldn't have said it better!

but Little Tobacco, lets take it further, what's to stop the rich powerful people from killing (accident) other people for there organs, this law would make some people be worth more dead than alive!

Honey Pot said...

I thought about this, and personally I would rather they took my parts and did something useful with them. Better they make use of my corpse than thinking of the alternative, it just becoming worm poop. I wonder how many times they could recycle a body part? Say for instance they took my left eyeball, (after I was dead of course) and put it in someone who was alive. Someone who lost their eyeball because they had it poked out with a sharp stick. If they met their demise, say if they went on a hunting trip with Dick Cheney;could they then take my perfectly good eyeball and put it another person? Could my eyeball live forever? I just don't think a corspe thinks...much about property rights and the like.

Moe said...

What does the Koran say about recycled body parts? Are the statists being sensitive to religion on this one? Or are cartoons more important to religion than the human body? How are we to screw virgins in the after life if some of our parts are missing?

Honey Pot said...

Good point Moe. I don't really want my body in the afterlife, if there is such a thing. I would prefer someone else's body. I am thinking if I make it to the pearly gates I don't want to be lugging this sorry arse around. I want long legs, and a bum that doesn't take on the shape of the chair I am sitting on. If there is a heaven I want rewarded to go there. I figure they will let me. if they let people in that are foolish enough to strap bombs on their bodies and walk into crowds of innocent people.I got it made in the shade, I haven't even contemplated doing something as screwy and evil as that.

I am thinking if the Prophet gives the Muslim men 14 virgins to rape, what do they give the Muslim women? If I were them I would questioning that.

Pietr said...

What they give Muslim women is obvious; only one Muslim prick for 14 women to take care of.