"Bodies" Exhibit Debate educational or high-profit unethical freakshow?
#31
Posted 27 November 2007 - 12:38 AM
Of course, I did mock anscestor worship. Maybe I shouldn't have. My anscestors burned people alive, possibly in ritual, possibly in punishment, and they were so damned weird eben the Romans were afraid to conquer them. That may be worthy of praise after all.
*Note to those afraid of organ donation: signing the card gives noone the power to do anything. A relative still has to speak for you. The card is legally meaningless, but often it reminds relatives of your wishes, and sometimes they decide to honour them.
#32
Posted 27 November 2007 - 08:22 AM
Of course, I did mock anscestor worship. Maybe I shouldn't have. My anscestors burned people alive, possibly in ritual, possibly in punishment, and they were so damned weird eben the Romans were afraid to conquer them. That may be worthy of praise after all.
*Note to those afraid of organ donation: signing the card gives noone the power to do anything. A relative still has to speak for you. The card is legally meaningless, but often it reminds relatives of your wishes, and sometimes they decide to honour them.
Civilian number 2
The collective assessment. Hmmm. Now that IS a scary way of making decisions. How is that assessment done exactly? By vote? Whoever screams the loudest? Number of posts in a debate forum?
And did you in the same post say that an individual's wishes should be honored after death? Sounds like you just contradicted yourself to me. Or, is it only wishes that YOU or the COLLECTIVE approve of? What if a person does NOT wish to be paraded around after death in an exhibit for other's profits? (afterall, I didn't think this debate was focused on organ donation.) What if they were carrying a card for that to remind their families (and governments) to 'honor' their wishes after death? Should it include other reminders, like not to be cannibalized?
#33
Posted 27 November 2007 - 09:12 AM
Regarding sacrements, I've heard it expressed that Abortion is the sacrament of the Democrat party. I think that's rightfully humorous.
#34
Posted 29 November 2007 - 03:48 AM
As for the term "collective assessment," you're taking to much out of that. All I said was everything JW's are retards for refusing blood donations, and that everyone believes that. Socially, we have zero bugaboos about blood, but there are all sorts of spiritual concerns about organs. That's a disparity I was drawing attention to. If you would instead like to discuss the difficulties in making collective decisions, and individual rights, please join one of the many Ayn Rand threads already on this board. Or perhaps the "libertarian" thread that recently went idle. I was talking about the oddness of thinking blood is no big deal but organs are sacred. Which is a totally different topic.
#35
Posted 29 November 2007 - 08:09 AM
I care what happens to my organs. I don’t want my liver going to someone who spent their whole life drinking. I don’t want my heart going to someone who molests children. And I definitely don’t want my kidneys to go to a racist, a democrat, or a reality television star.
These are little pieces of me. If there going to live on after the rest of me dies, I would like to know who I’m going to be inside of. Therefore, I care what happens to my bits and pieces when I die. I believe that my spiritual essence and my physical body are linked, at least to some extent. Agree or disagree, this is America, and I have a right to my religious beliefs. Maybe one day, when we turn into the communist society were headed for, the government can collect and distribute our organs among the masses without having to worry about an individual's freedom.
If people don’t want to donate their organs, they shouldn’t have to. Nature selects people to die from organ failure of whatever kind. If a person is supposed to have a healthy heart, then nature will provide them with one. If not, then nature obviously doesn’t want them passing on their genetic code, and producing more offspring with these sorts of deficiencies. Its sounds harsh, but this type of selection is what produced modern human beings. We certainly didnt get here by nature coddling us for however many thousands of years.
#36
Posted 29 November 2007 - 09:25 AM
#37
Posted 29 November 2007 - 03:25 PM
#38
Posted 29 November 2007 - 04:13 PM
And I guess I'll just repeat my argument on how I find it to be very educational, as it helps people (e.g., me) learn about and visualize the internal workings of the body - stuff one doesn't usually learn about in such visual detail without going to medical school. And if it entertains at the same time, great! Because no one would learn everything if all learning had to be boring. Should we ban things like Sesame Street, making ice cream to learn about matter, or playing games during P.E. to learn how to stay in shape because it's entertaining as well as educational? Or because Sesame Street, the milk and sugar companies, and the company that made that basketball gets a profit from educating the little tykes? I think not. So, assuming that the bodies used in the exhibits were all donated legitimately, I think it's a grand idea. (Though I disagree with the assertion of some that it should also be considered "art.")
#39
Posted 11 December 2007 - 04:23 PM
As far as the ressurection thing goes though, props to the Catholic church for their support of zombies.
#40
Posted 16 December 2007 - 01:25 AM
as for the slightly-off-topic: I would donate my body, but definitely not for public exhibition. I would donate my organs to people who needed them or to scientific research. I think it's also kind of unfortunate that while this exhibit provides ample opportunity to publicize donating one's body for medical purposes, it instead has been publicizing donating one's body for similar exhibits.
as for the slightly-more-off-topic: I've donated blood a few times, and felt like a better human being for it, but now they have my phone number and keep calling me because they want my blood. it's a little creepy. it's also been deterring me from donating blood, because maybe they're calling when I'm out of town, or when it's the middle of finals week and I have no time, or when I haven't been eating well and I think it's a bad idea to lose any precious bodily fluids. so now when I might ordinarily donate blood of my own accord, I think of them as those annoying people who keep calling me to ask for my blood. they would really be better off not doing that. (end of rant)
This post has been edited by Emu: 16 December 2007 - 01:25 AM
Remember Emu's face, people; one day it's going to be on the news alongside a headline about blowing some landmark to smithereens, and then we can all sigh and say, "She was such a normal person".....
....We'd be lying though.
-Laughlyn
If my doctor tells me to exercise, I am going to force him to do my homework.
-Mirithorn
- Do Not Use the Elevators - deviantART - Infinite Monkeys -
#41
Posted 16 December 2007 - 01:28 AM
This post has been edited by Snake Logan: 16 December 2007 - 01:29 AM
A Writing Guild For The Clinically Retarded
I am an honorary Crogerse.
#42
Posted 16 December 2007 - 12:41 PM
#43
Posted 16 December 2007 - 01:53 PM
What does a persons personality have to do with whether they are productive or not?
A Writing Guild For The Clinically Retarded
I am an honorary Crogerse.
#45
Posted 16 December 2007 - 04:19 PM
I should have said arse. Well I can’t go back in time so let’s pretend I never said that.
A Writing Guild For The Clinically Retarded
I am an honorary Crogerse.