| |
| ▲ | jbstack 3 days ago | parent [-] | | It's still a worthwhile comparison because it demonstrates that some people have a desire to turn their death into something meaningful or useful to others. After, all question was "what would motivate someone to willingly transform their last moments into a medical experiment?", and my examples are about motivation. For some that motivation might be strong enough to be willing to undergo some discomfort (if, indeed there needs to be any discomfort in the first place, which isn't clear). For others, it might not be. | | |
| ▲ | lynx97 3 days ago | parent [-] | | If you say so--for the sake of winning an arguemnt--there you go. You can have your victory, I don't care. The difference is still very fundamental, in a literal sense. Most people opposed to organ donations have religious reasons. I am an (not opted-out) organ donor, and I don't care about that. However, I would violently oppose being subjected to more machines then absolutely necessary while dying. | | |
| ▲ | jbstack 3 days ago | parent [-] | | It's not about my victory or yours. It's merely the recognition that people can have all sorts of reasons for doing all sorts of things, and one person can think nothing of doing a thing which the person next to them would never dream of doing. The fact that you personally would be happy to be an organ donor but would draw the line at having an ECG while dying is a perfectly valid position to take. Many people would no doubt take the same position. It's unlikely though that 60-70 million people per year would all react that way. Neither of us has to be right or wrong here (about the difference between the two scenarios), because it's other people's motivations we're talking about. |
|
|
|
