Where we differ
You and Squashed think you are being compassionate toward the guy who wants to sell his kidney, but it’s not compassion—it’s cruelty. He has a potential path out of poverty, and you want to block it. If you think it’s an awful path, give him a better one, so that the kidney sale looks less attractive.
Jeff, I assure you, I am trying very hard to give that guy a path out of poverty that doesn’t require him to sell chunks of his body. I have all sorts of ideas for programs that would have a much, much better chance of succeeding than a one-shot cash injection followed by a probable lifetime of health consequences.
The bold part is the point i’ve been wanting to make but Squashed beat me to. This whole “selling your organs” thing just sounds like a fancier pay day loan scheme, except instead of a crippling spiral of never-ending debt, you just have to go through the rest of your life down a kidney or with half a liver and all of the problems that come of that. What was the problem with changing the donor rules to being opt-out instead of opt-in, again? That just seems like a much simpler solution to the problem of organ donation, one that doesn’t involve more complicated regulation and oversight or the specter of organ harvesting.
3 months ago
Not soon enough. (posted with tweetshots.com)
I would settle for Keyboard Cat playing him off.
4 months ago4 months ago“What about seat belts?” you might be saying to yourself. “Don’t seat belts GUARANTEE that I CAN’T POSSIBLY die in a car?” Bzzzt! Wrongo. Every single day in this country, seat belts FAIL. In fact, I know of a study that proves—CONCLUSIVELY proves, people—that seat belts will fail 75 percent of the time.
Who did the study? Government workers.
It was only — let’s see — I think seven hours ago or eight hours ago when I — I have said before that I have deep concerns about the election. And I think that the world has deep concerns about the election. You’ve seen in Iran some initial reaction from the Supreme Leader that indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns about the election.
Now, it’s not productive, given the history of U.S.-Iranian relations, to be seen as meddling — the U.S. President meddling in Iranian elections. What I will repeat and what I said yesterday is that when I see violence directed at peaceful protestors, when I see peaceful dissent being suppressed, wherever that takes place, it is of concern to me and it’s of concern to the American people. That is not how governments should interact with their people.
And my hope is, is that the Iranian people will make the right steps in order for them to be able to express their voices, to express their aspirations. I do believe that something has happened in Iran where there is a questioning of the kinds of antagonistic postures towards the international community that have taken place in the past, and that there are people who want to see greater openness and greater debate and want to see greater democracy. How that plays out over the next several days and several weeks is something ultimately for the Iranian people to decide. But I stand strongly with the universal principle that people’s voices should be heard and not suppressed.