BL> I agree with that. The dead rate zero and the living rate 100.
 BL> Fuck the dead.

 RM> I prefer cuddling the living, sorry

  As I said... the living rate 100, dead 0.

 BL> There are already strict laws governing what relatives can do
 BL> with a dead body (rofl!), so why not write one law more, and
 BL> let the doctors have first pick of the organs?

 RM> That law would have an effect (not in your calloused mind,
 RM> perhaps, but in many others) on the euthanasia debate.

  I am talking about *DEAD* bodies, Roy. Have you ever seen one?
They are pretty hard to mistake for a live body. They tend to go cold
and smelly. Euthemnasia only works on LIVE bodies (the warm ones that
fart occasionally, but otherwise don't stink all that much).

 RM> My only disagreement with ET is that it could cheapen human
 RM> life in some cases

  How did we get from organs transplants to euthenasia? I love the way
you say: "I value the sanctity of *my* grief above a human life" and
without even changing thongs, you take the high ground on euthenasia
and the cheapness of human life... as if I'm the one who puts no value
on human LIFE... and I am happy to let some poor bastard DIE of kidney
failure so I can have a bit of a cry and let perfectly good bits rot
in the ground. Oh, yair... human life is sacred.

  It *IS*! Dead is dead, and one life is worth a thousand people in
grief for a fortnight.

  I'm not suggesting that you take the organs from live bodies, or
kill them especially... you value human life below a few tears and a
sob, and a grief that will be unchanged whether the body your mourn is
intact or not. I can tell you for nothing that you don't mourn the
body... it's the memory of the being, not a few kilos of rotten meat.

 RM> "You sick old bastard, why don't you stop annoying us and
 RM> leeching my hard earned money away from my kids? Go kill
 RM> yourself! After all, it's legal now!" Add to that the line
 RM> "Your liver is history, but someone might live longer with your
 RM> heart or kidneys, and you get no say in that. Do something
 RM> useful for once - bugger off and die."

  If you can't see the clear difference between claiming organs from
a dead and unrecoverable body, and a live one you are a very sick man
and I'm glad you're not a surgeon... or Doctor Death. Even Dr Mengeles
could tell the difference between dead bodies and live ones. He
devoted his life to it.

 RM> I'm in favour of euthanasia, but I think the conditions
 RM> attached will need very careful consideration. But I digress:

  Just a little... like whee! Let's fly to the Moon while we're here.
Organ transplants and euthenasia? Yair, same thing!

 BL> You are getting death mixed up with life! Dead is gone... you
 BL> ought to be ashamed of yourself! You'd rather let a perfectly
 BL> good set of organs rot and swell, turn green and stink,
 BL> underground in a box while the rest of your sweet daughter
 BL> turned corrupt with them, than let another human being use the
 BL> kidneys to live a life, or the corneas to see, or heart lung
 BL> and liver to give a full life to nothing but pain?

 RM> The benefit to the living is obvious, I agree wholeheartedly.
 RM> But asking me for her organs 10 seconds after she dies? What
 RM> planet are you from??

  I am suggesting that we *don't* ask you. Or even tell you. I am
suggesting that the law gives the surgeons first choice of anything
they like in dead bodies, and arrange things appropriately.

  Have you ever seen a dead body in a coffin? It may as well be an
empy shell... because it *IS*. They rip the guts out. If the body dies
without a doctor in attendance there is an automatic autopsy and all
the bits are put in bottles! The law dictates that... whether the
"owners" of the dead body like it or not. Stiff shit.  How is taking
the bits for transplants any different?

 RM> It's easy to discuss coldly when we're not involved, but it
 RM> gets different when things get personal. I offer as evidence
 RM> your uncharacteristic lack of response to my recent abortion of
 RM> a poem.

  Don't tell me about personal until you've buried a couple for
yourself.

  I think the reason for clinging to a liver, heart and kidneys is
that the "owner" of the dead body wants to keep it alive, in a weird
superstitious rite harking back to a shaman in a dark cave. But it's
dead. You know that finally, when you kiss it goodbye in the coffin
and it's all cold and waxy, with the guts thrown away and formaline
added... but by then it's too late for the sick person who could have
used the ears nose and throat, heart, eyes, lungs liver and kidneys...
that the undertaker has paid *YOUR* good money to have dumped as toxic
waste.

 BL> Dead is dead... and the usefulness of a dead body is an hour or
 BL> so. After that, what remains is in *your* head, as memory
 BL> alone. The dead meat is already going off.

 RM> True, but what is in my head will not be cold and rational at
 RM> that time.

  No one gives a shit about your grief. It is worthless. And it
will be the same whether the body has all its organs or not. So
grieve, you're entitled... just don't expect me to let you take a
perfectly good set of kidneys with you. Grieve without the kidneys.

 BL> I agree that people's wishes have to be respected, so I'd write
 BL> a law that simply removed the choice. That way, there is no
 BL> wish to respect, and if they don't like it they can root their
 BL> boot. We are not allowed to *eat* the dead, so how is this any
 BL> different?

 RM> er.. are you sure you have your arguments straight? If you
 RM> allow immediate automatic resumation of organs on death, why
 RM> waste all that meat as well?

  The same as an autopy... keep the bids and return the shell
tastefulkly sewn back together.

  But to answer your question: value. Human meat has no value. It
can't be eaten, so what do you suggest that we do with it? The
grieving rellos are willing to pay $6,000 to have the shell burned or
buried, so how can you hope to match that, even if you made lampshades
of the skin as the Germans did? A novelty item just can't hack it
against a $6,000 funeral.

  But there are those who would eat dead bodies, who believe this
gives them the qualities of the dear recently departed, and who even
go so far to help the deceased cross over,  with a nulla-nulla between
the eyes. Are we to respect a cannibal's lunatic wishes too? It is no
different: an irrational "owner" placing his wishes and beliefs above
that of human life.. where *nothing* rates above human life except
another human life.

Regards,
Bob
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
@EOT:

---