Before everyone goes all ga-ga about how great this LAW is - think about it for a second.
Who is the State to MANDATE that you even make a choice??
How about adding a check-box which says "ask my wife"...?
How about "none of your damned business"?
What amazes me is that everyone seems to think that it's OK to force people to declare anything either way. My organs are mine, and I have the right to be ambivalent about whether or not I want to donate them to another. I may not want to donate them today, but may change my mind tomorrow - or I may want to leave it up to my family to decide. Who knows?
The point being - the government has no right to compel me to state what I want done either way.
Jobs is a great guy - I'm very glad he got his liver - but he (like so many others these days) sees no problem with government intruding in areas that are none of their business.
Dave predicts: If this law passes, it gets overturned by the Supreme Court one day.
BTW: I agree with the poster who said that Jobs should loan out his Jet for people who need transplants. His reaction is unfortunately like many rich liberals - they see a need for something, and rather than put their own fortune at risk, they decide to try and influence government to make the rest of us go along with it. Here's one area, Steve, where you should maybe be a bit more like Bill Gates. You aren't taking any of those $$ to heaven with you. Give some to sick folks who need it.
One last observation, then I'll leave it be... Before anyone thinks this is a right-wing attack - I happen to think that we should allow folks who want to sell their organs (or part, thereof) to do so. I'm with John Stossel on this. If my kid needed an organ to keep them alive, I'd sell everything I own to give to someone who would donate it - wouldn't anyone? So why should the State ban such kinds of things from going on? Who benefits from the status quo? Who?
No one. That's who.
Dave
Of course nobody should be forced to decide right there and then at DMV, or be forced to donate organs against their will! Maybe the compromise is to make it easy for people to change their mind by Logging In to DMV to say, Yes, No?
As to comparing the generosities of Jobs and Gates, or anyone -- I've heard that one Q before... I also suspect that some people donate anonymously, because they don't want to start a long line of people at their doors, saying: how about donating to our cause etc...
That whole generosity topic can be quite sensitive... Again, we don't know what's in anyone's heart, or will... So let's not judge...
You have your rights, and are pretty vocal about it... Cool... Free speech... Steve has his rights..., like all of us...
It's a WIN FOR ALL OF US to be in those Registries! Why? Cause NOBODY knows if and when they'll need a Transplant! Registries only connect the dots - MATCHES... THEN and only THEN, not at DMV, the decision is up to the DONOR!!! Nobody said, that if we said YES at DMV, we signed our rights away forever, and they can take us away any time, and take our organs against our wishes!!! No!
If I said YES, and then I am dead, what do I care if my organs are used or not! Nobody is gonna die in a perfect condition, only to be buried or cremated! So, that vote NO, to make a great corps is silly...
But, of course there are religious reasons that prohibit organ donations! I recently heard of Religious Scholars in Israel changing the Religious Law to encourage organ donations! If those guys can show that kind of Open Mind, than we all, including the Religious Leaders worldwide, should at least consider this topic, instead of sweeping it under the rug, for the future generations, or till we, or our loved ones need a transplant...
Yep, like prisoners serving life sentences. I stopped being an organ donor years ago in protest because they give prisoners, even ones serving life sentences, organ transplants.
Until California changes the law to allow potential donors to specify their organs not go to prisoners, I will not be a donor.
It's hard to put into words how offensive I find your position. You are actively denying innocent people your organs because there is a small chance you might save a prisoner's life. And you're acting as if you're hurting the state with your protest when you're in fact hurting sick people. Jerk.
Why would he have to compensate Apple for flying people around when he owns the plane?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
I hope Jobs donates abundant time on his Gulfstream to fly people out to their transplants in situations like that, for starters. (Of course, he'll have to compensate Apple for the time used).
Indeed, even better, he should buy and run a couple of planes like that just for people in that type of situation.
------
Quote from article:
Schwarzenegger said. "Then we had great phone conversations back and forth. ... He knew that others don't have a plane waiting for them to get to a transplant."
Under the current system you already make a choice. If you fail to do anything, you have chosen to not donate. That choice may be unintentional or otherwise. The proposed system just makes the choice intentional.
Further, the Supreme Court has already held you do not have a constitutional right to have driver's license. That is a privilege a State hands out under conditions it dictates. I predict the Supreme Court will make no such ruling because a state is free to make it a condition of obtaining a driver's license to decide whether or not you want to donate a organ. A state's right to protect the health and wealth fare of the public will win out over an individual's liberty interest in not making a decision. Take for instance how the federal government makes it illegal to fail to answer the census.
Finally, Jobs donating his plane would make little difference because there would have to be a much better system to be able to locate available organs and the people needing the organs. Moreover, a quick four hour stop and back can cost eighty thousand dollars. The guy is loaded, but not that loaded. In addition, it is much better to have local organs available then to pour jet fuel down on the planet needlessly flying people around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dirtydiverdave
Before everyone goes all ga-ga about how great this LAW is - think about it for a second.
Who is the State to MANDATE that you even make a choice??
How about adding a check-box which says "ask my wife"...?
How about "none of your damned business"?
What amazes me is that everyone seems to think that it's OK to force people to declare anything either way. My organs are mine, and I have the right to be ambivalent about whether or not I want to donate them to another. I may not want to donate them today, but may change my mind tomorrow - or I may want to leave it up to my family to decide. Who knows?
The point being - the government has no right to compel me to state what I want done either way.
Jobs is a great guy - I'm very glad he got his liver - but he (like so many others these days) sees no problem with government intruding in areas that are none of their business.
Dave predicts: If this law passes, it gets overturned by the Supreme Court one day.
BTW: I agree with the poster who said that Jobs should loan out his Jet for people who need transplants. His reaction is unfortunately like many rich liberals - they see a need for something, and rather than put their own fortune at risk, they decide to try and influence government to make the rest of us go along with it. Here's one area, Steve, where you should maybe be a bit more like Bill Gates. You aren't taking any of those $$ to heaven with you. Give some to sick folks who need it.
One last observation, then I'll leave it be... Before anyone thinks this is a right-wing attack - I happen to think that we should allow folks who want to sell their organs (or part, thereof) to do so. I'm with John Stossel on this. If my kid needed an organ to keep them alive, I'd sell everything I own to give to someone who would donate it - wouldn't anyone? So why should the State ban such kinds of things from going on? Who benefits from the status quo? Who?
I agree with the poster who said that Jobs should loan out his Jet for people who need transplants. His reaction is unfortunately like many rich liberals - they see a need for something, and rather than put their own fortune at risk, they decide to try and influence government to make the rest of us go along with it. Here's one area, Steve, where you should maybe be a bit more like Bill Gates. You aren't taking any of those $$ to heaven with you. Give some to sick folks who need it.
One last observation, then I'll leave it be... Before anyone thinks this is a right-wing attack - I happen to think that we should allow folks who want to sell their organs (or part, thereof) to do so.
You had me in paragraph one and then lost me with paragraph two. Your suggestion has an eery similarity to China's "organ vans". Taking advantage of someone desperate for money is never a good thing wether they consent or not. Sometimes it's "your" (the sick person in this case) responsibility to do the right thing.
On another note, I have a problem helping out people who simply can't take care of themselves or have already lived a "full" life. It wasn't that long ago 60 was old, really old and the average lifespan was 50. My advice, drink only clean fresh water according to your body weight, eat whole foods, stay away from poisons (Drugs, smoking and processed foods) and toxic ingredients and the chances of having cancer or organ failure drop dramatically. Especially these days, most of us don't work in hazardous jobs anymore.
Now if someone needs an organ because of an accident or injury then I'd be happy to help, especially someone under the age of 50, but unless I have the option to dictate that I don't want to donate my organs to go to a 60 year old codger who for all practical purposes has already lived a "full" life and simply couldn't take care of themselves, then I would never donate an organ. Why would I want to extend my kindness or compassion to someone without any vision or understanding for the consequences of their selfish actions? How does that make the world a better place?
This is system set up by the wealthy bureaucrats (taking advantage of bleeding heart liberals who truly think they are doing the right thing) to take advantage of the less fortunate. Eat like crap, do drugs, poison your body and don't care about it because some poor sap will be there to give you a new organ, because your entitled to live "forever" based on your stature. Forget it! That's just selfish. You wonder who else might be on those waiting lists?
No big applause from me. Sorry Steve, but if you were really that grateful you'd spend a fraction your own damned billions to help others. That's called compassion and selflessness. Maybe your time in India was too far gone to remember what it means to be a Buddhist.
I hate to classify millions of people into a group, but why do baby boomers always strike me as "the most selfish generation"? "The greatest generation" my ass.
I'm willing to hear other arguments and admit that I'm wrong, but I need a cogent argument and not just an opinion.
Before everyone goes all ga-ga about how great this LAW is - think about it for a second.
Who is the State to MANDATE that you even make a choice??
It's the California Way, baby and it's heading National come Sunday! So better get used to it unless TEA Party rallies put the fear of God or at least re-election in some of those wayward politicians on Saturday. Of course you could have the astroturf COFFEE Party, which attracts 50 and CNN was there to provide coverage counter the TEA Party and its tens of thousands of supporters and have continued the dismissive attitude shown to real average Americans fed up with Washington!
Of course the only control one has over their body is the ability to choose to have an abortion or not, although that seems to be mandated by the government also...
Jeez, how's that saying go Michele... oh yeah... For the first time in my adult life, I have never been more disappointed in my country! Something like that.
But I'll end with 'Continued Best Wishes for Steve Jobs' health!"
Finally, Jobs donating his plane would make little difference because there would have to be a much better system to be able to locate available organs and the people needing the organs. Moreover, a quick four hour stop and back can cost eighty thousand dollars. The guy is loaded, but not that loaded.
Well he's in the top 50 wealthiest people according to Forbes (#43) and is worth 5.5 billion. C'mon 3% of that fortune would do a charity right and fit very neatly into a Buddhist philosophy. I mean where is this fortune going to end up when he dies anyway? His kids don't need but a fraction to have a healthy start in life and would be better people earning it themselves and learning not to be over privileged selfish brats anyway.
As to comparing the generosities of Jobs and Gates, or anyone -- I've heard that one Q before... I also suspect that some people donate anonymously, because they don't want to start a long line of people at their doors, saying: how about donating to our cause etc...
That whole generosity topic can be quite sensitive... Again, we don't know what's in anyone's heart, or will... So let's not judge...
You have your rights, and are pretty vocal about it... Cool... Free speech... Steve has his rights..., like all of us...
This I have to capitulate to. Very reasonable assumption.
Well he's in the top 50 wealthiest people according to Forbes (#43) and is worth 5.5 billion. C'mon 3% of that fortune would do a charity right and fit very neatly into a Buddhist philosophy.
The proposed law with require the CA DMV to ask, raise the Q:
Is OK to Donate your organs in event of your death! Yes or Will Decide Later!
As of now, they are not required to raise that Q, and thus don't! Thus, many people don't even know about it...
This law increases the awareness, and that increases all our odds for survival, if anyone of us ever needs a transplant!
Again, after I am dead, I can't use my organs! But there are more people who are not in jail that are in jail, and not everyone in jail is a murderer! Thus the assumption is that the organ will go to someone who did commit a crime!
The other point I made - bone marrow etc. -- that is the easiest thing in the world -- cotton swab in the mouse, and one is tested, and thus registered! Thus we all insure ourselves and others! Then, imagine you get to donate, which is not painful, nor risky! You'd save a life, and you can brag about it forever! Then, whenever you are having a bad day -- you can always remind yourself that you saved a life! Better yet, if the person you saved turned out to be good people, you got a great friend for life, plus all his/her family? And, in this world having such friends can't hurt!
Again, this law is about raising awareness, and insuring each other! It transcends politics, religions etc! And that's good! If nothing else, it gives other countries a reason to look up to us!
Also, as part of that awareness, people will have another opportunity to examine their lives etc., how they live them, and their role in society etc. That way it's not only when we go to the funerals that we raise those Big Questions, and are usually kinder to our fellow humans!
Maybe they can also offer a movie to watch, ala Defensive Driving Course, and a small symbolic discount on the fees, as the incentive? Ideally, the kids in school should be required to study these topics before they are old enough to drive! I see a lot of positive stuff that can develop from that awareness!
In the end, it's always voluntary, but the upside is that nobody will be able to play stupid, and claim that they didn't know, particularly when it becomes obvious that they or their loved ones could have helped!
This law could be a cheap, quick, easy step towards sainthood, in a way, so that we all be heroes in our lifetimes, or after we are gone! And knowing that should make us all feel better about ourselves, while we are alive!
Before everyone goes all ga-ga about how great this LAW is - think about it for a second.
Who is the State to MANDATE that you even make a choice??
How about adding a check-box which says "ask my wife"...?
How about "none of your damned business"?
What amazes me is that everyone seems to think that it's OK to force people to declare anything either way. My organs are mine, and I have the right to be ambivalent about whether or not I want to donate them to another. I may not want to donate them today, but may change my mind tomorrow - or I may want to leave it up to my family to decide. Who knows?
The point being - the government has no right to compel me to state what I want done either way.
Jobs is a great guy - I'm very glad he got his liver - but he (like so many others these days) sees no problem with government intruding in areas that are none of their business.
Dave predicts: If this law passes, it gets overturned by the Supreme Court one day.
BTW: I agree with the poster who said that Jobs should loan out his Jet for people who need transplants. His reaction is unfortunately like many rich liberals - they see a need for something, and rather than put their own fortune at risk, they decide to try and influence government to make the rest of us go along with it. Here's one area, Steve, where you should maybe be a bit more like Bill Gates. You aren't taking any of those $$ to heaven with you. Give some to sick folks who need it.
One last observation, then I'll leave it be... Before anyone thinks this is a right-wing attack - I happen to think that we should allow folks who want to sell their organs (or part, thereof) to do so. I'm with John Stossel on this. If my kid needed an organ to keep them alive, I'd sell everything I own to give to someone who would donate it - wouldn't anyone? So why should the State ban such kinds of things from going on? Who benefits from the status quo? Who?
No one. That's who.
Dave
You're dead already and while living you're worried about your soon to be useless organs that could save lives?
This law could be a cheap, quick, easy step towards sainthood, in a way, so that we all be heroes in our lifetimes, or after we are gone! And knowing that should make us all feel better about ourselves, while we are alive!
Yeah unless my organs save Bernie Madoff or an Enron exec. Can my ghost haunt them? Maybe if I could posses their bodies and give all of their money away (or return it to those from whom it was stolen) I might agree.
Take for instance how the federal government makes it illegal to fail to answer the census.
Lots to question in your ramble, but I'll stick to one: last I checked, the decennial census is legally required. (see FAQs 10, 11, 12 here: http://2010.census.gov/partners/pdf/ConstituentFAQ.pdf). No ifs and buts. The reason is, the US Constitution requires it:
"Representation and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers ... . The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."
-- Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States
Unless, of course, you belong to the Birther Brigade......
Yeah unless my organs save Bernie Madoff or an Enron exec. Can my ghost haunt them? Maybe if I could posses their bodies and give all of their money away (or return it to those from whom it was stolen) I might agree.
Cute... But, that sicko, Madoff, is already getting beaten up in jail... He is old... I doubt that those in charge would have him at the top of their list of transplant organs recipients..., same goes for convicted terrorists, and other extreme example... So, because of that really bad ones, why deny a gift of life to overwhelming majority of good people?
Again, are you, or those who agree with you, willing to wait till it's them or their loved ones to change their minds about this?
Again: ANYONE of us and our loved ones might need a transplant!
I don't see how each we can Save our own "Apple Script" with all the Conditions and Provisions on how our organ is to be used in various hypothetical situations! By the time those Conditions and Provisions are examined and debated, the 4-5-6 whatever number of HOURS window is closed, and the potential life saving organ goes into GARBAGE, thus useless to anyone!
So, with all my respect to everyone, I hope people will Opt In, until they really have a good reason to Opt Out later!
The education this law provides outweighs Madoffs, and all the terrorists in the world... And, those cases, let's make exceptions, so that they don't get it... Maybe allow some criminals to get it, if they are on a model behavior etc... Again, those compromises shouldn't hold up this law!
I don't mean to add fuel to this fire, but here is another related CA Law proposal:
We wholeheartedly support SB 1304, the Michelle Maykin Memorial Donation Protection Act, which will provide employees up to 5 days paid leave for the purposes of bone marrow donation.
Alas I am not in California, and thus can't sign it, but I agree with it... It looks like they are looking to do the right thing! Hopefully after good discussion they'll come up with a good law...
Again: anyone of us might someday need a transplant...
Again, are you, or those who agree with you, willing to wait till it's them or their loved ones to change their minds about this?
I would simply like to be able to leave specific instructions with my wife, kids, lawyer or an individual with power of attorney to make the decision based on my wishes. All of the technology that surrounds us these days should make this fairly practical, even if I have to fill out a questionnaire or leave some other documentation behind. It should not be a blanket policy, yes or no. Just my opinion and fortunately there are about 6 billion of us and the vast majority would probably disagree with me.
Comments
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPiKC8mbvkM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMjG2...om=PL&index=17
WOW LOL
Before everyone goes all ga-ga about how great this LAW is - think about it for a second.
Who is the State to MANDATE that you even make a choice??
How about adding a check-box which says "ask my wife"...?
How about "none of your damned business"?
What amazes me is that everyone seems to think that it's OK to force people to declare anything either way. My organs are mine, and I have the right to be ambivalent about whether or not I want to donate them to another. I may not want to donate them today, but may change my mind tomorrow - or I may want to leave it up to my family to decide. Who knows?
The point being - the government has no right to compel me to state what I want done either way.
Jobs is a great guy - I'm very glad he got his liver - but he (like so many others these days) sees no problem with government intruding in areas that are none of their business.
Dave predicts: If this law passes, it gets overturned by the Supreme Court one day.
BTW: I agree with the poster who said that Jobs should loan out his Jet for people who need transplants. His reaction is unfortunately like many rich liberals - they see a need for something, and rather than put their own fortune at risk, they decide to try and influence government to make the rest of us go along with it. Here's one area, Steve, where you should maybe be a bit more like Bill Gates. You aren't taking any of those $$ to heaven with you. Give some to sick folks who need it.
One last observation, then I'll leave it be... Before anyone thinks this is a right-wing attack - I happen to think that we should allow folks who want to sell their organs (or part, thereof) to do so. I'm with John Stossel on this. If my kid needed an organ to keep them alive, I'd sell everything I own to give to someone who would donate it - wouldn't anyone? So why should the State ban such kinds of things from going on? Who benefits from the status quo? Who?
No one. That's who.
Dave
Of course nobody should be forced to decide right there and then at DMV, or be forced to donate organs against their will! Maybe the compromise is to make it easy for people to change their mind by Logging In to DMV to say, Yes, No?
As to comparing the generosities of Jobs and Gates, or anyone -- I've heard that one Q before... I also suspect that some people donate anonymously, because they don't want to start a long line of people at their doors, saying: how about donating to our cause etc...
That whole generosity topic can be quite sensitive... Again, we don't know what's in anyone's heart, or will... So let's not judge...
You have your rights, and are pretty vocal about it... Cool... Free speech... Steve has his rights..., like all of us...
It's a WIN FOR ALL OF US to be in those Registries! Why? Cause NOBODY knows if and when they'll need a Transplant! Registries only connect the dots - MATCHES... THEN and only THEN, not at DMV, the decision is up to the DONOR!!! Nobody said, that if we said YES at DMV, we signed our rights away forever, and they can take us away any time, and take our organs against our wishes!!! No!
If I said YES, and then I am dead, what do I care if my organs are used or not! Nobody is gonna die in a perfect condition, only to be buried or cremated! So, that vote NO, to make a great corps is silly...
But, of course there are religious reasons that prohibit organ donations! I recently heard of Religious Scholars in Israel changing the Religious Law to encourage organ donations! If those guys can show that kind of Open Mind, than we all, including the Religious Leaders worldwide, should at least consider this topic, instead of sweeping it under the rug, for the future generations, or till we, or our loved ones need a transplant...
Yep, like prisoners serving life sentences. I stopped being an organ donor years ago in protest because they give prisoners, even ones serving life sentences, organ transplants.
Until California changes the law to allow potential donors to specify their organs not go to prisoners, I will not be a donor.
It's hard to put into words how offensive I find your position. You are actively denying innocent people your organs because there is a small chance you might save a prisoner's life. And you're acting as if you're hurting the state with your protest when you're in fact hurting sick people. Jerk.
I hope Jobs donates abundant time on his Gulfstream to fly people out to their transplants in situations like that, for starters. (Of course, he'll have to compensate Apple for the time used).
Indeed, even better, he should buy and run a couple of planes like that just for people in that type of situation.
------
Quote from article:
Schwarzenegger said. "Then we had great phone conversations back and forth. ... He knew that others don't have a plane waiting for them to get to a transplant."
To your continued good health Steve.
Consider restoring the Jackling House, see it's potential as a museum.
http://www.casadelherrero.com/index.html
Further, the Supreme Court has already held you do not have a constitutional right to have driver's license. That is a privilege a State hands out under conditions it dictates. I predict the Supreme Court will make no such ruling because a state is free to make it a condition of obtaining a driver's license to decide whether or not you want to donate a organ. A state's right to protect the health and wealth fare of the public will win out over an individual's liberty interest in not making a decision. Take for instance how the federal government makes it illegal to fail to answer the census.
Finally, Jobs donating his plane would make little difference because there would have to be a much better system to be able to locate available organs and the people needing the organs. Moreover, a quick four hour stop and back can cost eighty thousand dollars. The guy is loaded, but not that loaded. In addition, it is much better to have local organs available then to pour jet fuel down on the planet needlessly flying people around.
Before everyone goes all ga-ga about how great this LAW is - think about it for a second.
Who is the State to MANDATE that you even make a choice??
How about adding a check-box which says "ask my wife"...?
How about "none of your damned business"?
What amazes me is that everyone seems to think that it's OK to force people to declare anything either way. My organs are mine, and I have the right to be ambivalent about whether or not I want to donate them to another. I may not want to donate them today, but may change my mind tomorrow - or I may want to leave it up to my family to decide. Who knows?
The point being - the government has no right to compel me to state what I want done either way.
Jobs is a great guy - I'm very glad he got his liver - but he (like so many others these days) sees no problem with government intruding in areas that are none of their business.
Dave predicts: If this law passes, it gets overturned by the Supreme Court one day.
BTW: I agree with the poster who said that Jobs should loan out his Jet for people who need transplants. His reaction is unfortunately like many rich liberals - they see a need for something, and rather than put their own fortune at risk, they decide to try and influence government to make the rest of us go along with it. Here's one area, Steve, where you should maybe be a bit more like Bill Gates. You aren't taking any of those $$ to heaven with you. Give some to sick folks who need it.
One last observation, then I'll leave it be... Before anyone thinks this is a right-wing attack - I happen to think that we should allow folks who want to sell their organs (or part, thereof) to do so. I'm with John Stossel on this. If my kid needed an organ to keep them alive, I'd sell everything I own to give to someone who would donate it - wouldn't anyone? So why should the State ban such kinds of things from going on? Who benefits from the status quo? Who?
No one. That's who.
Dave
I agree with the poster who said that Jobs should loan out his Jet for people who need transplants. His reaction is unfortunately like many rich liberals - they see a need for something, and rather than put their own fortune at risk, they decide to try and influence government to make the rest of us go along with it. Here's one area, Steve, where you should maybe be a bit more like Bill Gates. You aren't taking any of those $$ to heaven with you. Give some to sick folks who need it.
One last observation, then I'll leave it be... Before anyone thinks this is a right-wing attack - I happen to think that we should allow folks who want to sell their organs (or part, thereof) to do so.
You had me in paragraph one and then lost me with paragraph two. Your suggestion has an eery similarity to China's "organ vans". Taking advantage of someone desperate for money is never a good thing wether they consent or not. Sometimes it's "your" (the sick person in this case) responsibility to do the right thing.
On another note, I have a problem helping out people who simply can't take care of themselves or have already lived a "full" life. It wasn't that long ago 60 was old, really old and the average lifespan was 50. My advice, drink only clean fresh water according to your body weight, eat whole foods, stay away from poisons (Drugs, smoking and processed foods) and toxic ingredients and the chances of having cancer or organ failure drop dramatically. Especially these days, most of us don't work in hazardous jobs anymore.
Now if someone needs an organ because of an accident or injury then I'd be happy to help, especially someone under the age of 50, but unless I have the option to dictate that I don't want to donate my organs to go to a 60 year old codger who for all practical purposes has already lived a "full" life and simply couldn't take care of themselves, then I would never donate an organ. Why would I want to extend my kindness or compassion to someone without any vision or understanding for the consequences of their selfish actions? How does that make the world a better place?
This is system set up by the wealthy bureaucrats (taking advantage of bleeding heart liberals who truly think they are doing the right thing) to take advantage of the less fortunate. Eat like crap, do drugs, poison your body and don't care about it because some poor sap will be there to give you a new organ, because your entitled to live "forever" based on your stature. Forget it! That's just selfish. You wonder who else might be on those waiting lists?
No big applause from me. Sorry Steve, but if you were really that grateful you'd spend a fraction your own damned billions to help others. That's called compassion and selflessness. Maybe your time in India was too far gone to remember what it means to be a Buddhist.
I hate to classify millions of people into a group, but why do baby boomers always strike me as "the most selfish generation"? "The greatest generation" my ass.
I'm willing to hear other arguments and admit that I'm wrong, but I need a cogent argument and not just an opinion.
Before everyone goes all ga-ga about how great this LAW is - think about it for a second.
Who is the State to MANDATE that you even make a choice??
It's the California Way, baby and it's heading National come Sunday! So better get used to it unless TEA Party rallies put the fear of God or at least re-election in some of those wayward politicians on Saturday. Of course you could have the astroturf COFFEE Party, which attracts 50 and CNN was there to provide coverage counter the TEA Party and its tens of thousands of supporters and have continued the dismissive attitude shown to real average Americans fed up with Washington!
Of course the only control one has over their body is the ability to choose to have an abortion or not, although that seems to be mandated by the government also...
Jeez, how's that saying go Michele... oh yeah... For the first time in my adult life, I have never been more disappointed in my country! Something like that.
But I'll end with 'Continued Best Wishes for Steve Jobs' health!"
Finally, Jobs donating his plane would make little difference because there would have to be a much better system to be able to locate available organs and the people needing the organs. Moreover, a quick four hour stop and back can cost eighty thousand dollars. The guy is loaded, but not that loaded.
Well he's in the top 50 wealthiest people according to Forbes (#43) and is worth 5.5 billion. C'mon 3% of that fortune would do a charity right and fit very neatly into a Buddhist philosophy. I mean where is this fortune going to end up when he dies anyway? His kids don't need but a fraction to have a healthy start in life and would be better people earning it themselves and learning not to be over privileged selfish brats anyway.
As to comparing the generosities of Jobs and Gates, or anyone -- I've heard that one Q before... I also suspect that some people donate anonymously, because they don't want to start a long line of people at their doors, saying: how about donating to our cause etc...
That whole generosity topic can be quite sensitive... Again, we don't know what's in anyone's heart, or will... So let's not judge...
You have your rights, and are pretty vocal about it... Cool... Free speech... Steve has his rights..., like all of us...
This I have to capitulate to. Very reasonable assumption.
Well he's in the top 50 wealthiest people according to Forbes (#43) and is worth 5.5 billion. C'mon 3% of that fortune would do a charity right and fit very neatly into a Buddhist philosophy.
Not in Zen Buddhism.
The proposed law with require the CA DMV to ask, raise the Q:
Is OK to Donate your organs in event of your death! Yes or Will Decide Later!
As of now, they are not required to raise that Q, and thus don't! Thus, many people don't even know about it...
This law increases the awareness, and that increases all our odds for survival, if anyone of us ever needs a transplant!
Again, after I am dead, I can't use my organs! But there are more people who are not in jail that are in jail, and not everyone in jail is a murderer! Thus the assumption is that the organ will go to someone who did commit a crime!
The other point I made - bone marrow etc. -- that is the easiest thing in the world -- cotton swab in the mouse, and one is tested, and thus registered! Thus we all insure ourselves and others! Then, imagine you get to donate, which is not painful, nor risky! You'd save a life, and you can brag about it forever
Again, this law is about raising awareness, and insuring each other! It transcends politics, religions etc! And that's good
Also, as part of that awareness, people will have another opportunity to examine their lives etc., how they live them, and their role in society etc. That way it's not only when we go to the funerals that we raise those Big Questions, and are usually kinder to our fellow humans!
Maybe they can also offer a movie to watch, ala Defensive Driving Course, and a small symbolic discount on the fees, as the incentive? Ideally, the kids in school should be required to study these topics before they are old enough to drive! I see a lot of positive stuff that can develop from that awareness!
In the end, it's always voluntary, but the upside is that nobody will be able to play stupid, and claim that they didn't know, particularly when it becomes obvious that they or their loved ones could have helped!
This law could be a cheap, quick, easy step towards sainthood, in a way, so that we all be heroes in our lifetimes, or after we are gone! And knowing that should make us all feel better about ourselves, while we are alive!
Before everyone goes all ga-ga about how great this LAW is - think about it for a second.
Who is the State to MANDATE that you even make a choice??
How about adding a check-box which says "ask my wife"...?
How about "none of your damned business"?
What amazes me is that everyone seems to think that it's OK to force people to declare anything either way. My organs are mine, and I have the right to be ambivalent about whether or not I want to donate them to another. I may not want to donate them today, but may change my mind tomorrow - or I may want to leave it up to my family to decide. Who knows?
The point being - the government has no right to compel me to state what I want done either way.
Jobs is a great guy - I'm very glad he got his liver - but he (like so many others these days) sees no problem with government intruding in areas that are none of their business.
Dave predicts: If this law passes, it gets overturned by the Supreme Court one day.
BTW: I agree with the poster who said that Jobs should loan out his Jet for people who need transplants. His reaction is unfortunately like many rich liberals - they see a need for something, and rather than put their own fortune at risk, they decide to try and influence government to make the rest of us go along with it. Here's one area, Steve, where you should maybe be a bit more like Bill Gates. You aren't taking any of those $$ to heaven with you. Give some to sick folks who need it.
One last observation, then I'll leave it be... Before anyone thinks this is a right-wing attack - I happen to think that we should allow folks who want to sell their organs (or part, thereof) to do so. I'm with John Stossel on this. If my kid needed an organ to keep them alive, I'd sell everything I own to give to someone who would donate it - wouldn't anyone? So why should the State ban such kinds of things from going on? Who benefits from the status quo? Who?
No one. That's who.
Dave
You're dead already and while living you're worried about your soon to be useless organs that could save lives?
Seriously?
This law could be a cheap, quick, easy step towards sainthood, in a way, so that we all be heroes in our lifetimes, or after we are gone! And knowing that should make us all feel better about ourselves, while we are alive!
Yeah unless my organs save Bernie Madoff or an Enron exec. Can my ghost haunt them? Maybe if I could posses their bodies and give all of their money away (or return it to those from whom it was stolen) I might agree.
Why would he have to compensate Apple for flying people around when he owns the plane?
If he does, then so much the easier for him to donate its time.
...
I'm willing to hear other arguments and admit that I'm wrong, ...
That's rich!
Take for instance how the federal government makes it illegal to fail to answer the census.
Lots to question in your ramble, but I'll stick to one: last I checked, the decennial census is legally required. (see FAQs 10, 11, 12 here: http://2010.census.gov/partners/pdf/ConstituentFAQ.pdf). No ifs and buts. The reason is, the US Constitution requires it:
"Representation and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers ... . The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."
-- Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States
Unless, of course, you belong to the Birther Brigade......
That's rich!
Nice Icon.
Yeah unless my organs save Bernie Madoff or an Enron exec. Can my ghost haunt them? Maybe if I could posses their bodies and give all of their money away (or return it to those from whom it was stolen) I might agree.
Cute... But, that sicko, Madoff, is already getting beaten up in jail... He is old... I doubt that those in charge would have him at the top of their list of transplant organs recipients..., same goes for convicted terrorists, and other extreme example... So, because of that really bad ones, why deny a gift of life to overwhelming majority of good people?
Again, are you, or those who agree with you, willing to wait till it's them or their loved ones to change their minds about this?
Again: ANYONE of us and our loved ones might need a transplant!
I don't see how each we can Save our own "Apple Script"
So, with all my respect to everyone, I hope people will Opt In, until they really have a good reason to Opt Out later!
The education this law provides outweighs Madoffs, and all the terrorists in the world... And, those cases, let's make exceptions, so that they don't get it... Maybe allow some criminals to get it, if they are on a model behavior etc... Again, those compromises shouldn't hold up this law!
I don't mean to add fuel to this fire, but here is another related CA Law proposal:
We wholeheartedly support SB 1304, the Michelle Maykin Memorial Donation Protection Act, which will provide employees up to 5 days paid leave for the purposes of bone marrow donation.
More info on it here: http://bit.ly/bDj2fh
Alas I am not in California, and thus can't sign it, but I agree with it... It looks like they are looking to do the right thing! Hopefully after good discussion they'll come up with a good law...
Again: anyone of us might someday need a transplant...
Again, are you, or those who agree with you, willing to wait till it's them or their loved ones to change their minds about this?
I would simply like to be able to leave specific instructions with my wife, kids, lawyer or an individual with power of attorney to make the decision based on my wishes. All of the technology that surrounds us these days should make this fairly practical, even if I have to fill out a questionnaire or leave some other documentation behind. It should not be a blanket policy, yes or no. Just my opinion and fortunately there are about 6 billion of us and the vast majority would probably disagree with me.