jfh@phs.UUCP (03/01/84)
Since the abortion "debate" has been conducted in this news group I'll post this here.... There is a move afoot in the congress to regulate organ donations at the federal level. One of the proposed provisions would prohibit the sale of any body parts. The supposed rationale for this is to prevent the poor from becoming "spare parts heaps" for the rich. How do you feel about this? Now let me point out that this provision effectively prohibits people from exercising control over their own bodies. (I need money, I want to sell one of my kidneys, but I can't because its against the law.) Now how do you feel about it? It seems to me that any proponent of abortion who uses the "control over ones own body" argument would have to be opposed to this regulation. Can you justify one position but not the other? Rational comments on this (or any other) subject are welcome. Flames to /dev/null. Nobody said it was easy, Fran Heidlage duke!phs!jfh
jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) (03/04/84)
> Now let me point out that this provision effectively prohibits people > from exercising control over their own bodies. (I need money, I want to sell > one of my kidneys, but I can't because its against the law.) not at all. You could still do anything you want with your *body*. You can still have your kidney removed, and you can still give it away, but you can't sell it. The prohibition is only against the money transaction, not against what you do with your body. Your argument is like saying "If I have my leg amputated, I want to be able to go kill someone by bashing them over the head with the bone. The law says I can't do this, therefore the law prevents me from having control over my own body." Jeff Winslow
mazur@inmet.UUCP (03/07/84)
#R:phs:-220300:inmet:10900058:000:694
inmet!mazur Mar 6 20:44:00 1984
There is a move afoot in the congress to regulate organ donations
at the federal level. One of the proposed provisions would prohibit the
sale of any body parts. The supposed rationale for this is to prevent
the poor from becoming "spare parts heaps" for the rich.
I thought the rationale for this was to prevent rich people from "outbidding"
poor people in their efforts to get an organ.
Besides that, the analogy of control of the body doesn't really apply. Women
are not allowed to "sell" their children, before or after birth. Although
whether being paid to be a surrogate mother is "selling" is probably a matter
of interpretation.
Beth Mazur
{ima,harpo,esquire}!inmet!mazur