For advertisement

Sample

7/16/2008

After debating, murder also can...

We should encourage more debate on the organ trading issues. And after the debate, whatever the decisions we take, at least we can claim that we have discussed it thoroughly and not based on gut feel. Then we can close the topic, satisfied that we have done what was needed. Is this good enough? If the decision is not to allow organ trading, many kidney failure patients will continue to die, will continue to wait to die. Have we done justice to them? Then the very desperate poor who want to sacrifice to better their families' lives, are we closing the little window that can give them a better life and be happy about it? We have decided, the not involved party, distinterested party, the neutral party with no vested interest in the process, must be the best people to make the decision. Is this so? There is a saying, if you have not lived in the other person's shoe, you do not know what you are talking about.

6 comments:

Mockingbird said...

Similar to the debate on whether to have the casinos or not? But at the end of the day, the gahmen's decision stands firm? Yah. Gahmen has already decided on whether to have casino, all along. They just got us to debate over it for fun, laughter, peace and joy.

redbean said...

ok, you have your say.

Anonymous said...

This is just another wayang show put out by the Gahmen who has lost the moral authority to lead Singapore.

Anonymous said...

don't be so critical of your government, without the pap singapore is nothing. you guys are living in paradise and yet you all complaints so much.

marlin212

redbean said...

hi marlin,

i think that is a good way to show our appreciation of the govt and all the good things it has done. the people should just believe that everything is in good hands and be happy about it. all peace under heaven.

oh, by the way, which govt we should be grateful to? the govt of today or yesterday?

redbean said...

what is the view of you guys?

should the people just be happy and believe, don't question and don't comment?

or should the citizens be thinking and questioning?