killer wants to donate his organs

Godfather.

why not ?

Godfather.

http://www.katu.com/news/local/118152519.html

keeponrockin

I don't see why not either. I'm a big supporter of donation, my family knows/filled out the card, if I die, open me up! I won't need my kidneys/liver/whatever else anymore.

dimitrispearljam

exactly..why not...seems ok to me

Jeanwah

I don't see what the big deal is. Let him donate! I know I will be.

gimmesometruth27

i am kind of torn on this one. the article says the 3 drug cocktail used ruins organs. if the 3 drugs ruin organs, why does the single drug not do the same? either way the victim is poisoned so in my mind i am thinking that the organ might be ruined because the drugs work systematically, meaining on particular systems of the body so i am guessing that the organs involved in that particular system only would be ruined.

i read somewhere that there is possibly a phenomenon caled "cellular memory" where the people who receive transplanted organs have at times taken on characteristics of the donor. like if the donor was an alcoholic the recipient takes on those same characteristics. i am wondering if the same can be possible in people with a violent past...

http://hubpages.com/hub/Cellular-Memori ... Recipients

http://bobsnewheart.wordpress.com/2008/ ... -of-donor/

http://bobsnewheart.wordpress.com/2009/ ... ality-too/

The Waiting Trophy Man

I'll take this one step further and say that murderers, especially the hardcore ones, like child murderers and serial rapists should be 'put down' and their organs donated with or without consent. That is how they can repay society instead of sitting in jail and living off taxpayer dollars. But good on him for doing this. I guess it's the least he can do.

Godfather.

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i am kind of torn on this one. the article says the 3 drug cocktail used ruins organs. if the 3 drugs ruin organs, why does the single drug not do the same? either way the victim is poisoned so in my mind i am thinking that the organ might be ruined because the drugs work systematically, meaining on particular systems of the body so i am guessing that the organs involved in that particular system only would be ruined.

i read somewhere that there is possibly a phenomenon caled "cellular memory" where the people who receive transplanted organs have at times taken on characteristics of the donor. like if the donor was an alcoholic the recipient takes on those same characteristics. i am wondering if the same can be possible in people with a violent past...

http://hubpages.com/hub/Cellular-Memori ... Recipients

http://bobsnewheart.wordpress.com/2008/ ... -of-donor/

http://bobsnewheart.wordpress.com/2009/ ... ality-too/

put em out carve em up take the goods then administer the final dose
but the cellular memory thing is a tough one, a good bro of mine had a heart transplant and died a little over a year later but he never mentioned anything like that cellular memory stuff, if I need a organ to save my life I think I would take the chance.

Godfather.

gimmesometruth27

The Waiting Trophy Man wrote:

I'll take this one step further and say that murderers, especially the hardcore ones, like child murderers and serial rapists should be 'put down' and their organs donated with or without consent. That is how they can repay society instead of sitting in jail and living off taxpayer dollars. But good on him for doing this. I guess it's the least he can do.

i believe that what you are proposing would require a surgeon to harvest the organs in the midst of an execution. and no surgeon in his right mind and operating within the scope of his license or hippocratic oath would stoop to stealing organs. this hypthetical situation is highly unethical because a surgeon's task is to "do no harm", and harvesting vital organs from a person who is living is tantamount to attempted murder, and taking them from a dead person without consent is stealing.

also there are religious implications involved with this. some faiths require the body to be complete and undissected when it is prepared for burial, cremation, etc. taking organs from those people would violate their religious rights.

_

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

The Waiting Trophy Man wrote:

I'll take this one step further and say that murderers, especially the hardcore ones, like child murderers and serial rapists should be 'put down' and their organs donated with or without consent. That is how they can repay society instead of sitting in jail and living off taxpayer dollars. But good on him for doing this. I guess it's the least he can do.

i believe that what you are proposing would require a surgeon to harvest the organs in the midst of an execution. and no surgeon in his right mind and operating within the scope of his license or hippocratic oath would stoop to stealing organs. this hypthetical situation is highly unethical because a surgeon's task is to "do no harm", and harvesting vital organs from a person who is living is tantamount to attempted murder, and taking them from a dead person without consent is stealing.

also there are religious implications involved with this. some faiths require the body to be complete and undissected when it is prepared for burial, cremation, etc. taking organs from those people would violate their religious rights.

Fucking liberal. Always thinking about rights & shit!

gimmesometruth27

_ wrote:

Fucking liberal. Always thinking about rights & shit!

is that sensitive and defensive enough for you?


um, actually yeah, going back and re-reading that makes me kinda sound like a pussy...but hey, we have to remain consistent and stand by what we believe in, right?

_

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

_ wrote:

Fucking liberal. Always thinking about rights & shit!

is that sensitive and defensive enough for you?

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

um, actually yeah, going back and re-reading that makes me kinda sound like a pussy...but hey, we have to remain consistent and stand by what we believe in, right?

I didn't think you sounded like a pussy.... not that there's anything wrong with pussies.

catefrances

so long as its not hair... cause i saw what happened to homer when he got a hair transplant from snake. 8-)

Prince Of Dorkness

Better him than me.

I refuse to donate my organs. As a gay man, I'm not permitted to donate blood.

If you won't take my blood when I'm alive, you can lick me where I shit if you think you're getting my gizzard once I'm dead.

gimmesometruth27

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Better him than me.

I refuse to donate my organs. As a gay man, I'm not permitted to donate blood.

If you won't take my blood when I'm alive, you can lick me where I shit if you think you're getting my gizzard once I'm dead.

i am sure for some reason they would deny using your organs as well....i mean, if they deny your right to give blood, how can they possibly allow your organs to be used? the blood in question no doubt runs through those organs, so for them to deny you the chance to donate blood, it seems to me that you would automatically be denied the opportunity to donate your organs...because, logically speaking, you can not use the organs if you can not use the blood that runs through those organs.

personally, i would not be turning down anything, blood, organs, tissue, etc unless it was proven to me beyond a reasonable doubt that your homosexual blood is more contaminated than blood donated from any random heterosexual. blood is blood, if it is disease free, why can we not use it???? :?

mysticweed

Jeanwah wrote:

I don't see what the big deal is. Let him donate! I know I will be.

same here
and
same here