Why can't I sell my kidney?

Who is the fanatic who decides that I can't sell my kidney? Why should such fanatics have so much say over my body parts? There are many people who are living in misery, not even able to feed themselves with a full meal a day. Some hungry for the whole of their lives. To these people, to be able to sell a part of their body for $20k or $30k can make their lives so much more pleasant even for a year or two. Why should the elite of the world decide on the fate of these miserable people and condemned them to perpetual misery? Will their lives be better off selling a part of it or will they be better off in their pathetic state of being alive? Then there are also the body parts of the dead or going to die. Cadavers have been so to medical students. Nothing new. HOTA has been farming body parts for free. Should the people have the right to ownership of their body parts and will it to be sold to benefit their love ones? Can it be seen as private properties, assets to be handed down? Why is it that the state owns our bodies when we are dead and also owns our bodies when we are alive? In the case of willing buyer and willing seller, let the market forces determine how it should be sold. Why are we tempering with the market mechanism in a century when oppression or slavery can be persecuted by the law? Should the law make provisions to allow people more freedom to live a life they so choose, even to sell their body parts, fully aware and responsible for their own actions? Human body parts are definitely better than animal or synthetic parts. Many have gone to waste through ignorance. Let the owners of their parts decide what they want to do with them. Any fanatics want to impose their moral values and superior righteousness over the rest of the people?


Anonymous said...

Fanatics are now ruling the world. They accused others of being fanatics, yet they are the first to be fanatical in their judgments and decisions and explanations. They point their fingers at others as extremists, yet they never failed to use extreme examples to spin their propaganda. They sued others for defamation, yet they are the ones who keep defaming their opponents knowing fully well that their opponents are too weak to sue them back. These are the wolves in sheep skins, the foxes in deer skins, and the crocodiles who tears in public shamelessly and proudly just so to con people into sympathy. That is life in today's world. BUT it won't be long. The world is breaking up soon. See what happened in the Sichuan Earthquake, the Myanmar Cyclone and the Sumatra Tsunami? More will come soon.

Anonymous said...

There are those who are in favour of legalizing selling of human kidneys say that we only need one kidney to live a normal life. I wonder if this reflects their real believe or are they hypocrites.

Anonymous said...

If LKY needs the kidney, does the rule even applies ?

redbean said...

we are all human beans. not living gods. we shall not dictate to people how they should live their lives. let the people exercise their choices consciously without pressure and coercion.

there are beans who would find trading their organs a better option than living their lives in misery.

for those who think they are living gods, please do not act too smug. you are just another simple bean.

Anonymous said...

Indeed, to say people should not dictate to others how they should live their lives is admirable. But to apply this judgement to go supporting that people should thus be allowed to sell their own kidney becomes callous. There are many simple bean who cant make correct decision when they are clouded by their financial predicament. I've read that Many in India who had sold their kidneys regreted doing so.

Anonymous said...

"let the people exercise their choices consciously without pressure and coercion"

Now how is that possible if as you also say ..

"(these people) are living in misery, not even able to feed themselves with a full meal a day."

Should those in need have to sell 'a pound of their flesh' to better their lives, or can't we think of a way to offer a helping hand?

redbean said...

what people should not do is to impose on others their values. saying it is one thing. but to make laws to say you can or cannot do this or that is a different thing. let the people decide what they want to do with their lives.

help them by providing a level playing field, with good regulations to protect them. the present stand is that if the kidney patients die, so be it. if all the poor souls continue to be poor and miserable, so be it.

by legalising organ trade, the people have a choice to decide for themselves. provide counselling services to enlighten them. lay the cards on the table and explain the pros and cons.

gone were the days when god says, thou shalt not do this or that. we can do with lesser of such gods. in reality most of them are assholes.

Anonymous said...

People should not get muddled-headed and take the opposite stand on such issues simply to go against 'assholes'.

This matter concerns everyone that I believe will be able to weigh whats right and not in what we all say. We have to be careful less what we say loses credibility.

Taking out a kidney is not like taking out a testicle. Otherwise, relatives of those in need of kidneys would all volunteer to offer theirs, instead of buying.

Do not think those who had to sell their kidneys do so willingly. They do so sorrowfully. They are actually committing suicide to their wellbeing. Should we take advantage of the poor giving them tuppence for that bit of their lives.

Yes,tuppence, becos to the rich their kidneys are priceless.

redbean said...

i fully agree with you that taking an organ is a life threatening act and an organ is priceless. but what is tuppence to A is a fortune to B.

we must not act like gods and think that the poor and illiterate cannot think. what we can do is to live the options to them. we are not forcing anyone to sell their organs. we lay down the rules to protect all parties and let them decide.

we must not act so godly to say that this is the right way and only way. our right ways have often been proven wrong. or gods right ways have often proven otherwise.

regulations on such a procedure could be carefully studied and work out by the supertalents instead of a simple no. god is not always right.

redbean said...

by the way, is cpf life the only right way to go? is medisave lock up a right thing to do?

gods say yes. i am showing them my middle finger.

Anonymous said...

I have no conflict with many of your views, including the cpf thing. But the 'gods' dont always make mistakes do they? I just dont believe they simply made a decision to say no. It'll be more sensible to think they had deliberated on the matter.

redbean said...

some things are not a matter of right or wrong or mistakes. some are just differences in values. as an eg, the catholic forbids abortion. it is a value thing.

in the case of organ trading, it is not a matter of right or wrong. it is value. some value life more than others. some value money and material comfort more than spiritual well being.

to each his own values. no one shall be allowed to have his values imposed on others.

Anonymous said...

If it is not a matter of right or wrong but difference in values, then whose values should prevail? If those who disapprove the sale of kidneys are called gods or fanatics who impose their values on others, what do we call those who dictate otherwise?

I believe people who went through abortion live with a deep regret the rest of their lives. People in the 1st world would not consider selling their kidneys despite poverty. We only hear of such desperate ideas in the 3rd world because there are people destitute of human feelings, tempting the poor with filthy lucres for their kidneys.

redbean said...

you still refuse to understand, right?

i am not saying that organ trading is right. neither am i saying that people must be forced to trade their kidneys.

my position is simple. let the owner decide for himself. no one is to tell him that he cannot or he must do it.

do i answer your question of whose value?

Anonymous said...

If we have even that inkling that organ trading is not right, its our conscience that tells us.

In a society, unless already established in the custom of a known religious group or people, values should be common. The more essential ones ought to be legislated.

If no one is to tell anyone what he can or cannot do, even incest would proliferate.

redbean said...

i think we all have the same inkling that prostitution is not right, gambling and drinking is not right, corruption is not right etc etc

but all these can be made to look right. or at least we can live with them or indulge in them.

Anonymous said...

Would you also say incest should be made to look right or, at least live with it or indulge in it? I'm sure you won't.

redbean said...

this world is populated by the children of adam and eve. who do you think adam's children married to when they were the only people on earth. ok, ok, this is over exaggeration.

comparing incest with organ trading is not a sensible way of discussion. incest is just an extreme example that distort the argument. incest is not only biologically wrong, it is also ethically wrong.

does selling of the organ falls into the same category?

Anonymous said...

If there was adam and eve, why do you think they fell from heaven? If there was only adam and eve, whose idea was it their children should be left to propagate. Was it God's intention, his mistake or, those creatures continued defiance. If it was truly meant to be God's intention, which powerful devil subsequently outlawed it that whole world up to now follow and abide by it?

OK, you say we cant compare organ trading with incest. How do you come about comparing organ trading with gambling, drinking and etc etc. Do they fall into the same category?

redbean said...

these are all man made offences. man decides that they are not good. they are harmful to people and society. no the act itself but its consequences.

organ trading, like trading of hair, blood, are not necessarily harmful to the person donating. one kidney is enough to live. one pint of blood less in a month will not kill the donor.

even selling one eye is not death threatening. many people will sacrifice themselves for their loved ones. to them, the sacrifice is what they are prepared to do in return for something which they want. by saying no, they can't even sacrifice for their loved ones.

now man is making laws to say no. but man can say yes and life goes on. compare to incest, saying yes will create monsters or the degeneration of the genes and the human species.

organ trading is a value thing. so are drug taking, prostitution etc. incest is more than just a value thing.

redbean said...

forgot to add. selling the organ could save a life. it is life giving.

Anonymous said...

You made comparison of organ trading with the likeness of gambling, drinking, etc and etc becos people still indulge in and live with these, but you now acknowledge that they are man made offences and are deemed harmful to people though only from their consequences. You must know, in contrast, removing a kidney whittles a persons health standing immediately he loses it.

What hair and blood trading are you talking about? Our blood is continually replaced by new ones every fortnight, not to mention hair.

Say truthfully, would you sell your kidney or a lung should you be in the same plight as the two Indonesians? A survey that was done showed that many would buy a kidney but would not sell theirs. It goes to show that people with enough knowledge know better never to part with their precious organ.

Anonymous said...

may I add, to say selling your kidney to save a life is bulls. It's more plausible saying buying a kidney to save my life.
Whoever had to sell his kidney would have been in misery to care so much about saving other people's life.

redbean said...

people will do anything to uplift their lives. people will kill or risk being killed to do that. drug trafficking is a death offence. people still doing it.

the survey? by who on who? if the survey is conducted among the fairly rich singaporeans who have everything, they will only think of buying kidneys to live happily everafter.

if the survey were conducted among the poor and desperate in the third world countries, you will get a different result.

the selling of their kidney comes with a reward that only they will know if the trade off is good enough for their sacrifices. it is not going to be given for free. everything as a price.

Pierre Png gave his kidney for his loved one for free. that is ok? if he demands a payment, not ok? why would pierre png be motivated to give away his kidney and risk his life? why allow him to risk his life?

redbean said...

is pierre png in misery? is the indonesian in misery about selling his kidney for 186 mil rupiah?

yes, his lawyer said he regretted, he is feeling weak, cannot work like before. you believe him?

he came back to arrange for another sale. worthy trade or he regretted it?

Anonymous said...

Hi i am Ramakant from India ready to donate my Kidney Blood Group A -ve contact me on 09028016171 or my mail kidneydonor40@yahoo.com

Anonymous said...

Good post. I learn something new and challenging on sites I stumbleupon on a daily basis.
It's always exciting to read through articles from other authors and practice a little something from their sites.

Check out my web blog; all inclusive vacation packages

Anonymous said...

Tell them why you blog and share with them any information regarding you that is
relative to the blog theme itself. Prioritize
Blogging around School Responsibilities blog writing and related
activities should not be done before homework assignments.
General availability of RSS Button Make a RSS button widely available for any blog
traffic that lands on your internet site.